Luis Lassaletta , Miryam Calvino , Isabel Sánchez-Cuadrado , Elena Muñoz , Javier Gavilán
{"title":"基于解剖学的适配能否改善成年人工耳蜗用户的音乐感知？","authors":"Luis Lassaletta , Miryam Calvino , Isabel Sánchez-Cuadrado , Elena Muñoz , Javier Gavilán","doi":"10.1016/j.bjorl.2024.101533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To compare Anatomy-Based Fitting (ABF) vs. Default Fitting (DF) in terms of music perception and music enjoyment in CI users.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>CI users ≥ 18 years implanted with a Synchrony ST Flex28 (MEDEL) with at least 12 months of experience with either ABF or DF, with good speech tests outcomes (≥ 65% disyllables) were enrolled. Music tasks were assessed with “Discovery” level of Meludia online interactive music tool, which includes Rhythm (beat count), Spatialization (differentiating between lower and higher notes), Stable/unstable (perception of stability or instability), Melody (ascendant or descendant), and Density (presence of one or multiple simultaneous sounds). Each task consists of five levels of difficulty. Participants were allowed a maximum of 4 attempts to complete a level. The Music-Related Quality of Life (MuRQoL) and the Munich Music (MUMU) questionnaires evaluated music background.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty CI users took part: 10 using ABF and 10 DF. There were no significant differences in age at implantation (53.2 ± 15.0 vs. 53.8 ± 14.5y), time since surgery (1.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.4 ± 1.5y), or the percentage of disyllables in silence (68.0 ± 8.0 vs. 77.3 ± 11.5%) between groups. Regarding Meludia scores, differences were observed between both groups in Density: ABF had better mean scores when completing the level in only one attempt (8.7 ± 2.5 vs. 4.6 ± 3.1, <em>p</em> = 0.016) and required fewer restarts to complete the five levels (6.6 ± 1.6 vs. 9.3 ± 2.3; <em>p</em> = 0.009). Furthermore, the fifth level of Density was successfully completed by 60% of patients with ABF, while none of the patients with DF achieved this (<em>p</em> = 0.003). The scores obtained in MuRQoL were similar between ABF and DF groups. In a similar way, the MUMU showed no differences in terms of frequency and music importance.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>ABF demonstrates specific advantages in certain musical tasks, specifically in processing multiple sounds simultaneously. Further studies are necessary to explore additional benefits of ABF in musical skills in CI users. NCT05319678.</div></div><div><h3>Level of evidence</h3><div>Level 3.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49099,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","volume":"91 2","pages":"Article 101533"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can anatomy-based fitting improve musical perception in adult cochlear implant users?\",\"authors\":\"Luis Lassaletta , Miryam Calvino , Isabel Sánchez-Cuadrado , Elena Muñoz , Javier Gavilán\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bjorl.2024.101533\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To compare Anatomy-Based Fitting (ABF) vs. Default Fitting (DF) in terms of music perception and music enjoyment in CI users.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>CI users ≥ 18 years implanted with a Synchrony ST Flex28 (MEDEL) with at least 12 months of experience with either ABF or DF, with good speech tests outcomes (≥ 65% disyllables) were enrolled. Music tasks were assessed with “Discovery” level of Meludia online interactive music tool, which includes Rhythm (beat count), Spatialization (differentiating between lower and higher notes), Stable/unstable (perception of stability or instability), Melody (ascendant or descendant), and Density (presence of one or multiple simultaneous sounds). Each task consists of five levels of difficulty. Participants were allowed a maximum of 4 attempts to complete a level. The Music-Related Quality of Life (MuRQoL) and the Munich Music (MUMU) questionnaires evaluated music background.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty CI users took part: 10 using ABF and 10 DF. There were no significant differences in age at implantation (53.2 ± 15.0 vs. 53.8 ± 14.5y), time since surgery (1.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.4 ± 1.5y), or the percentage of disyllables in silence (68.0 ± 8.0 vs. 77.3 ± 11.5%) between groups. Regarding Meludia scores, differences were observed between both groups in Density: ABF had better mean scores when completing the level in only one attempt (8.7 ± 2.5 vs. 4.6 ± 3.1, <em>p</em> = 0.016) and required fewer restarts to complete the five levels (6.6 ± 1.6 vs. 9.3 ± 2.3; <em>p</em> = 0.009). Furthermore, the fifth level of Density was successfully completed by 60% of patients with ABF, while none of the patients with DF achieved this (<em>p</em> = 0.003). The scores obtained in MuRQoL were similar between ABF and DF groups. In a similar way, the MUMU showed no differences in terms of frequency and music importance.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>ABF demonstrates specific advantages in certain musical tasks, specifically in processing multiple sounds simultaneously. Further studies are necessary to explore additional benefits of ABF in musical skills in CI users. NCT05319678.</div></div><div><h3>Level of evidence</h3><div>Level 3.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology\",\"volume\":\"91 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 101533\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1808869424001484\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1808869424001484","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的比较基于解剖的装配（ABF）与默认装配（DF）对 CI 用户音乐感知和音乐享受的影响：方法：招募年龄≥ 18 岁、植入 Synchrony ST Flex28 (MEDEL)、使用 ABF 或 DF 至少 12 个月、语音测试结果良好（双音节率≥ 65%）的 CI 用户。音乐任务使用 Meludia 在线互动音乐工具的 "发现 "级别进行评估，包括节奏（节拍计数）、空间化（区分低音和高音）、稳定/不稳定（感知稳定或不稳定）、旋律（升调或降调）和密度（同时出现一个或多个声音）。每项任务由五个难度级别组成。参与者最多可尝试 4 次完成一个级别。音乐相关生活质量（MuRQoL）和慕尼黑音乐（MUMU）问卷对音乐背景进行了评估：结果：20 名 CI 用户参加了调查：10 人使用 ABF，10 人使用 DF。植入时的年龄（53.2 ± 15.0 岁 vs. 53.8 ± 14.5 岁）、手术后的时间（1.8 ± 0.5 岁 vs. 2.4 ± 1.5 岁）或静音时的双音节百分比（68.0 ± 8.0% vs. 77.3 ± 11.5%）在各组间无明显差异。关于 Meludia 分数，两组之间在密度上存在差异：ABF 组在只尝试一次就完成该级别时平均得分更高（8.7 ± 2.5 vs. 4.6 ± 3.1，p = 0.016），在完成五个级别时需要重新开始的次数更少（6.6 ± 1.6 vs. 9.3 ± 2.3；p = 0.009）。此外，60% 的 ABF 患者成功完成了第五级密度，而 DF 患者则无一成功完成（p = 0.003）。ABF 组和 DF 组的 MuRQoL 得分相似。同样，MUMU 在频率和音乐重要性方面也没有显示出差异：结论：ABF 在某些音乐任务中，尤其是在同时处理多种声音方面表现出了特殊的优势。有必要开展进一步研究，探索 ABF 对 CI 用户音乐技能的其他益处。NCT05319678.证据等级：3级。
Can anatomy-based fitting improve musical perception in adult cochlear implant users?
Objectives
To compare Anatomy-Based Fitting (ABF) vs. Default Fitting (DF) in terms of music perception and music enjoyment in CI users.
Methods
CI users ≥ 18 years implanted with a Synchrony ST Flex28 (MEDEL) with at least 12 months of experience with either ABF or DF, with good speech tests outcomes (≥ 65% disyllables) were enrolled. Music tasks were assessed with “Discovery” level of Meludia online interactive music tool, which includes Rhythm (beat count), Spatialization (differentiating between lower and higher notes), Stable/unstable (perception of stability or instability), Melody (ascendant or descendant), and Density (presence of one or multiple simultaneous sounds). Each task consists of five levels of difficulty. Participants were allowed a maximum of 4 attempts to complete a level. The Music-Related Quality of Life (MuRQoL) and the Munich Music (MUMU) questionnaires evaluated music background.
Results
Twenty CI users took part: 10 using ABF and 10 DF. There were no significant differences in age at implantation (53.2 ± 15.0 vs. 53.8 ± 14.5y), time since surgery (1.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.4 ± 1.5y), or the percentage of disyllables in silence (68.0 ± 8.0 vs. 77.3 ± 11.5%) between groups. Regarding Meludia scores, differences were observed between both groups in Density: ABF had better mean scores when completing the level in only one attempt (8.7 ± 2.5 vs. 4.6 ± 3.1, p = 0.016) and required fewer restarts to complete the five levels (6.6 ± 1.6 vs. 9.3 ± 2.3; p = 0.009). Furthermore, the fifth level of Density was successfully completed by 60% of patients with ABF, while none of the patients with DF achieved this (p = 0.003). The scores obtained in MuRQoL were similar between ABF and DF groups. In a similar way, the MUMU showed no differences in terms of frequency and music importance.
Conclusions
ABF demonstrates specific advantages in certain musical tasks, specifically in processing multiple sounds simultaneously. Further studies are necessary to explore additional benefits of ABF in musical skills in CI users. NCT05319678.
期刊介绍：
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology publishes original contributions in otolaryngology and the associated areas (cranio-maxillo-facial surgery and phoniatrics). The aim of this journal is the national and international divulgation of the scientific production interesting to the otolaryngology, as well as the discussion, in editorials, of subjects of scientific, academic and professional relevance.
The Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology is born from the Revista Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia, of which it is the English version, created and indexed by MEDLINE in 2005. It is the official scientific publication of the Brazilian Association of Otolaryngology and Cervicofacial Surgery. Its abbreviated title is Braz J Otorhinolaryngol., which should be used in bibliographies, footnotes and bibliographical references and strips.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
