In this study, the performance with the CI is investigated over time in three groups of freshly implanted CI users. Both the standard frequency-band distribution and anatomy-based fitting will be used to compare outcomes.
In this study, the performance with the CI is investigated over time in three groups of freshly implanted CI users. The first group is fitted using the standard frequency-band distribution as implemented in MAESTRO 9. In the second group of users, an anatomy-based frequency distribution is used as per anatomy-based fitting in MAESTRO 9. The performance with anatomy-based fitting is assessed by comparing performance with the CI in these two groups over time. The third group constitutes the within-subject design. These subjects are both fitting using the standard frequency-band distribution and the anatomy-based frequency distribution in MAESTRO 9. So, subjects will have both study maps on their audio processor throughout the whole study. They will have to change weekly between both fittings: standard fitting and anatomy-based fitting. Here, the performance with anatomy-based fitting is assessed by comparing performance with standard fitting and anatomy-based fitting.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
30
MAESTRO 9 can display the tonotopic frequency of each individual electrode channel imported from OTOPLAN to further support fitting based on these measures. The audiologist can set a frequency-band distribution that is more closely aligned to the tonotopic frequency distribution as imported from OTOPLAN.
These group is fitted using the standard frequency-band distribution as implemented in MAESTRO 9.
Patients of this group are both fitting using the standard frequency-band distribution and the anatomy-based frequency distribution in MAESTRO 9. So, subjects will have both study maps on their audio processor throughout the whole study. They will have to change weekly between both fittings: standard fitting and anatomy-based fitting. Here, the performance with anatomy-based fitting is assessed by comparing performance with standard fitting and anatomy-based fitting.
Hospital Universitario de La Paz
Madrid, Madrid, Spain
RECRUITINGResult from the speech test in noise (S0N0)
Speech perception evaluation with CI-only (MATRIX) with signal and noise in the same channel
Time frame: Month 6
Results from speech tests in noise with spatially separated loudspeakers
Speech perception evaluation with CI-only (MATRIX) with signal and noise in different channels
Time frame: Month 6
Result from the speech test in quiet (S0)
Speech perception evaluation with CI-only (disyllables)
Time frame: Month 6
Results of quality of sound
Subjective results through Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index 19. Scores range 19-133 points. Higher scores mean a better outcome.
Time frame: Month 6
Results of quality of life in challenging situations
Subjective results through Listening effort questionnaire. Scores range 21-93 points. Higher scores mean a better outcome.
Time frame: Month 6
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.