Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing

Publication date: Available online 30 June 2017
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Benjamin Krüger, Andreas Büchner, Waldo Nogueira
Ipsilateral electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) is becoming increasingly important in cochlear implant (CI) treatment. Improvements in electrode designs and surgical techniques have contributed to improved hearing preservation during implantation. Consequently, CI implantation criteria have been expanded toward people with significant residual low-frequency hearing, who may benefit from the combined use of both the electric and acoustic stimulation in the same ear. However, only few studies have investigated the mutual interaction between electric and acoustic stimulation modalities.This work characterizes the interaction between both stimulation modalities using psychophysical masking experiments and cone beam computer tomography (CBCT). Two psychophysical experiments for electric and acoustic masking were performed to measure the hearing threshold elevation of a probe stimulus in the presence of a masker stimulus. For electric masking, the probe stimulus was an acoustic tone while the masker stimulus was an electric pulse train. For acoustic masking, the probe stimulus was an electric pulse train and the masker stimulus was an acoustic tone.Five EAS users, implanted with a CI and ipsilateral residual low-frequency hearing, participated in the study. Masking was determined at different electrodes and different acoustic frequencies. CBCT scans were used to determine the individual place-pitch frequencies of the intracochlear electrode contacts by using the Stakhovskaya place-to-frequency transformation. This allows the characterization of masking as a function of the difference between electric and acoustic stimulation sites, which we term the electric-acoustic frequency difference (EAFD).The results demonstrate a significant elevation of detection thresholds for both experiments. In electric masking, acoustic-tone thresholds increased exponentially with decreasing EAFD. In contrast, for the acoustic masking experiment, threshold elevations were present regardless of the tested EAFDs. Based on the present findings, we conclude that there is an asymmetry between the electric and the acoustic masker modalities. These observations have implications for the design and fitting of EAS sound-coding strategies.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2tyOtPh
via IFTTT

Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing

Publication date: Available online 30 June 2017
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Benjamin Krüger, Andreas Büchner, Waldo Nogueira
Ipsilateral electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) is becoming increasingly important in cochlear implant (CI) treatment. Improvements in electrode designs and surgical techniques have contributed to improved hearing preservation during implantation. Consequently, CI implantation criteria have been expanded toward people with significant residual low-frequency hearing, who may benefit from the combined use of both the electric and acoustic stimulation in the same ear. However, only few studies have investigated the mutual interaction between electric and acoustic stimulation modalities.This work characterizes the interaction between both stimulation modalities using psychophysical masking experiments and cone beam computer tomography (CBCT). Two psychophysical experiments for electric and acoustic masking were performed to measure the hearing threshold elevation of a probe stimulus in the presence of a masker stimulus. For electric masking, the probe stimulus was an acoustic tone while the masker stimulus was an electric pulse train. For acoustic masking, the probe stimulus was an electric pulse train and the masker stimulus was an acoustic tone.Five EAS users, implanted with a CI and ipsilateral residual low-frequency hearing, participated in the study. Masking was determined at different electrodes and different acoustic frequencies. CBCT scans were used to determine the individual place-pitch frequencies of the intracochlear electrode contacts by using the Stakhovskaya place-to-frequency transformation. This allows the characterization of masking as a function of the difference between electric and acoustic stimulation sites, which we term the electric-acoustic frequency difference (EAFD).The results demonstrate a significant elevation of detection thresholds for both experiments. In electric masking, acoustic-tone thresholds increased exponentially with decreasing EAFD. In contrast, for the acoustic masking experiment, threshold elevations were present regardless of the tested EAFDs. Based on the present findings, we conclude that there is an asymmetry between the electric and the acoustic masker modalities. These observations have implications for the design and fitting of EAS sound-coding strategies.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2tyOtPh
via IFTTT

Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing

Publication date: Available online 30 June 2017
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Benjamin Krüger, Andreas Büchner, Waldo Nogueira
Ipsilateral electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) is becoming increasingly important in cochlear implant (CI) treatment. Improvements in electrode designs and surgical techniques have contributed to improved hearing preservation during implantation. Consequently, CI implantation criteria have been expanded toward people with significant residual low-frequency hearing, who may benefit from the combined use of both the electric and acoustic stimulation in the same ear. However, only few studies have investigated the mutual interaction between electric and acoustic stimulation modalities.This work characterizes the interaction between both stimulation modalities using psychophysical masking experiments and cone beam computer tomography (CBCT). Two psychophysical experiments for electric and acoustic masking were performed to measure the hearing threshold elevation of a probe stimulus in the presence of a masker stimulus. For electric masking, the probe stimulus was an acoustic tone while the masker stimulus was an electric pulse train. For acoustic masking, the probe stimulus was an electric pulse train and the masker stimulus was an acoustic tone.Five EAS users, implanted with a CI and ipsilateral residual low-frequency hearing, participated in the study. Masking was determined at different electrodes and different acoustic frequencies. CBCT scans were used to determine the individual place-pitch frequencies of the intracochlear electrode contacts by using the Stakhovskaya place-to-frequency transformation. This allows the characterization of masking as a function of the difference between electric and acoustic stimulation sites, which we term the electric-acoustic frequency difference (EAFD).The results demonstrate a significant elevation of detection thresholds for both experiments. In electric masking, acoustic-tone thresholds increased exponentially with decreasing EAFD. In contrast, for the acoustic masking experiment, threshold elevations were present regardless of the tested EAFDs. Based on the present findings, we conclude that there is an asymmetry between the electric and the acoustic masker modalities. These observations have implications for the design and fitting of EAS sound-coding strategies.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2tyOtPh
via IFTTT

Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing

Publication date: Available online 30 June 2017
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Benjamin Krüger, Andreas Büchner, Waldo Nogueira
Ipsilateral electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) is becoming increasingly important in cochlear implant (CI) treatment. Improvements in electrode designs and surgical techniques have contributed to improved hearing preservation during implantation. Consequently, CI implantation criteria have been expanded toward people with significant residual low-frequency hearing, who may benefit from the combined use of both the electric and acoustic stimulation in the same ear. However, only few studies have investigated the mutual interaction between electric and acoustic stimulation modalities.This work characterizes the interaction between both stimulation modalities using psychophysical masking experiments and cone beam computer tomography (CBCT). Two psychophysical experiments for electric and acoustic masking were performed to measure the hearing threshold elevation of a probe stimulus in the presence of a masker stimulus. For electric masking, the probe stimulus was an acoustic tone while the masker stimulus was an electric pulse train. For acoustic masking, the probe stimulus was an electric pulse train and the masker stimulus was an acoustic tone.Five EAS users, implanted with a CI and ipsilateral residual low-frequency hearing, participated in the study. Masking was determined at different electrodes and different acoustic frequencies. CBCT scans were used to determine the individual place-pitch frequencies of the intracochlear electrode contacts by using the Stakhovskaya place-to-frequency transformation. This allows the characterization of masking as a function of the difference between electric and acoustic stimulation sites, which we term the electric-acoustic frequency difference (EAFD).The results demonstrate a significant elevation of detection thresholds for both experiments. In electric masking, acoustic-tone thresholds increased exponentially with decreasing EAFD. In contrast, for the acoustic masking experiment, threshold elevations were present regardless of the tested EAFDs. Based on the present findings, we conclude that there is an asymmetry between the electric and the acoustic masker modalities. These observations have implications for the design and fitting of EAS sound-coding strategies.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2tyOtPh
via IFTTT

Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing

Publication date: Available online 30 June 2017
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Benjamin Krüger, Andreas Büchner, Waldo Nogueira
Ipsilateral electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) is becoming increasingly important in cochlear implant (CI) treatment. Improvements in electrode designs and surgical techniques have contributed to improved hearing preservation during implantation. Consequently, CI implantation criteria have been expanded toward people with significant residual low-frequency hearing, who may benefit from the combined use of both the electric and acoustic stimulation in the same ear. However, only few studies have investigated the mutual interaction between electric and acoustic stimulation modalities.This work characterizes the interaction between both stimulation modalities using psychophysical masking experiments and cone beam computer tomography (CBCT). Two psychophysical experiments for electric and acoustic masking were performed to measure the hearing threshold elevation of a probe stimulus in the presence of a masker stimulus. For electric masking, the probe stimulus was an acoustic tone while the masker stimulus was an electric pulse train. For acoustic masking, the probe stimulus was an electric pulse train and the masker stimulus was an acoustic tone.Five EAS users, implanted with a CI and ipsilateral residual low-frequency hearing, participated in the study. Masking was determined at different electrodes and different acoustic frequencies. CBCT scans were used to determine the individual place-pitch frequencies of the intracochlear electrode contacts by using the Stakhovskaya place-to-frequency transformation. This allows the characterization of masking as a function of the difference between electric and acoustic stimulation sites, which we term the electric-acoustic frequency difference (EAFD).The results demonstrate a significant elevation of detection thresholds for both experiments. In electric masking, acoustic-tone thresholds increased exponentially with decreasing EAFD. In contrast, for the acoustic masking experiment, threshold elevations were present regardless of the tested EAFDs. Based on the present findings, we conclude that there is an asymmetry between the electric and the acoustic masker modalities. These observations have implications for the design and fitting of EAS sound-coding strategies.



from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2tyOtPh
via IFTTT

Regulation of KCNQ/Kv7 family voltage-gated K(+) channels by lipids.

Related Articles

Regulation of KCNQ/Kv7 family voltage-gated K(+) channels by lipids.

Biochim Biophys Acta. 2017 04;1859(4):586-597

Authors: Taylor KC, Sanders CR

Abstract
Many years of studies have established that lipids can impact membrane protein structure and function through bulk membrane effects, by direct but transient annular interactions with the bilayer-exposed surface of protein transmembrane domains, and by specific binding to protein sites. Here, we focus on how phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate (PIP2) and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) impact ion channel function and how the structural details of the interactions of these lipids with ion channels are beginning to emerge. We focus on the Kv7 (KCNQ) subfamily of voltage-gated K(+) channels, which are regulated by both PIP2 and PUFAs and play a variety of important roles in human health and disease. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Lipid order/lipid defects and lipid-control of protein activity edited by Dirk Schneider.

PMID: 27818172 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2tunQui
via IFTTT

Language and False-Belief Task Performance in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Purpose

Language is related to false-belief (FB) understanding in both typically developing children and children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The current study examined the role of complementation and general language in FB understanding. Of interest was whether language plays similar or different roles in the groups' FB performance.

Method

Participants were 16 typically developing children (mean age = 5.0 years; mental age = 6.7) and 18 with ASD (mean age = 7.3 years; mental age = 8.3). Children were administered FB and language tasks (say- and think-complements), receptive and expressive vocabulary tests, and relative clauses.

Results

When mental age and receptive and expressive vocabulary were used as separate covariates, the typical control group outperformed the children with ASD in FB task performance. Chi-square analyses indicated that passing both complementation tasks was linked to the FB understanding of children with ASD. Children with ASD who passed FB tasks all passed say- and think-complement tasks. However, some children in the control group were able to pass the FB tasks, even if they failed the say- and think-complement tasks.

Conclusion

The results indicate that children with ASD relied more on complement understanding to pass FB than typically developing children. Results are discussed regarding the developmental pathways for FB understanding.

from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2u7sAUx
via IFTTT