Comparison of Speech Recognition and Localization Performance in Bilateral and Unilateral Cochlear Implant Users Matched on Duration of Deafness and Age at Implementation

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to compare speech recognition and localization performance of subjects who wear bilateral cochlear implants (CICI) with subjects who wear a unilateral cochlear implant (true CI-only). Design: A total of 73 subjects participated in this study. Specifically, of the 73 subjects, 64 (32 CICI and 32 true CI-only) participated in the word recognition testing; 66 (33 CICI and 33 true CI-only) participated in the sentence recognition testing; and 24 (12 CICI and 12 true CI-only) participated in the localization testing. Because of time constraints not all subjects completed all testing. The average age at implantation for the CICI and true CI-only listeners who participated in the speech perception testing was 54 and 55 yrs, respectively, and the average duration of deafness was 8 yrs for both groups of listeners. The average age at implantation for the CICI and true CI-only listeners who participated in the localization testing was 54 and 53 yrs, respectively, and the average duration of deafness was 10 yrs for the CICI listeners and 11 yrs for the true CI-only listeners. All speech stimuli were presented from the front. The test setup for everyday sound localization comprised an eight-speaker array spanning, an arc of approximately 108° in the frontal horizontal plane. Results: Average group results were transformed to Rationalized Arcsine Unit scores. A comparison in performance between the CICI score and the true CI-only score in quiet revealed a significant difference between the two groups with the CICI group scoring 19% higher for sentences and 24% higher for words. In addition, when both cochlear implants were used together (CICI) rather than when either cochlear implant was used alone (right CI or left CI) for the CICI listeners, results indicated a significant binaural summation effect for sentences and words. Conclusion: The average group results in this study showed significantly greater benefit on words and sentences in quiet and localization for listeners using two cochlear implants over those using only one cochlear implant. One explanation of this result might be that the same information from both sides are combined, which results in a better representation of the stimulus. A second explanation might be that CICI allow for the transfer of different neural information from two damaged peripheral auditory systems leading to different patterns of information summating centrally resulting in enhanced speech perception. A future study using similar methodology to the current one will have to be conducted to determine if listeners with two cochlear implants are able to perform better than listeners with one cochlear implant in noise.