GH Pitié-Salpêtrière, APHP 6
Paris, 75651 Paris Cedex 13, France
Location status: Recruiting
NCT Number: NCT04591093
Main objective:
Investigate on new cochlear implanted patients whether the FineHearing strategy of the MED-EL cochlear implant gives better results on musical perception if the depth of stimulation (stimulation or not of the apical areas) is greater.
Secondary objectives:
Evaluate the effect of stimulation depth on vocal audiometric results, results of differential frequency threshold test and on qualitative sound perception.
Interested in participating?
Request Info18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Paris, 75651 Paris Cedex 13, France
Location status: Recruiting
Introduction:
Conventional stimulation strategies in cochlear implants (e.g. ACE, CIS) use the place of the electrode to code the frequency by sending low frequency information on the apical electrodes and high frequency information on the basal electrodes. The stimulation rate of the electrodes is constant.
The pitch is only partially transmitted by these conventional strategies which would explain the poor results of cochlear implants in the perception of music.
In the FineHearing strategy of the MED-EL implant, the rate of stimulation on the low-frequency electrodes is related to the frequency of the sound and makes it possible to code the frequency information temporally.
Rader & al. 2016 have studied the contribution of adding to the tonotopic coding of the frequency (classical strategy) a temporal coding of the information by varying the stimulation rate. The results obtained show that providing this frequency information by time coding makes it possible to obtain perceived pitch much closer to the expected pitch (of normal-hearing) and less variability, especially at low frequencies. With fixed stimulation rate (classical strategy) low frequencies are poorly coded, whereas with the variable stimulation rate they are better coded.
In addition, Landsberger et al. [2018] studied in six subjects with a MED-EL implant the perception of a temporal coding according to the position of the electrodes with a long insertion: middle or apical position. The results seem to show that the temporal coding of the frequency would be more reliable than the spatial coding (related to the position of the electrode) at the apex, and the reverse on the electrodes in the middle position.
Studies have shown that the FineHearing strategy can provide benefits over the classic HDCIS strategy in tasks involving the fundamental F0 such as speech recognition in noise (after a certain learning time) [Kleine Punte & al. 2014 ; Vermeire & al. 2010], the perception of music [Roy & al. 2015 ; Roy & al. 2016] or the perceived quality of pitch [Müller & al. 2012].
The results obtained seem to depend on the position of the electrode: a deep insertion to reach the apical zone of the cochlea would allow better coding of the information.
MED-EL's FineHearing coding strategy with stimulation of the apical areas of the cochlea (long insertion of electrodes) could therefore allow better transmission of musical pitch and in particular improve the subjective quality of music compared to the same stimulation strategy without reaching the apical areas (short insertion).
Objective of the study: The objective of the study is to evaluate if the FineHearing strategy of MED-EL with stimulation of the apical zones allows to better transmit musical pitch and in particular to improve the subjective quality of the music compared to the same stimulation strategy without apical stimulation.
Main objective:
Show that the FineHearing strategy of MED-EL with stimulation of the apical zones allows to obtain a better perceptual quality of music in newly implanted cochlear patients than the same strategy without apical stimulation.
Secondary objectives:
Plan of study:
it is a Single-center, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Cochlear implant with FineHearing Strategy with 10 more apical electrodes activated or with 10 more basal electrodes activated
Time frame: at 1 month post-activation
The Gabrielsson scale (1988) is used to evaluate perceived sound quality as a multidimensional phenomenon, that is composed of a number of separate perceptual dimensions. Eight perceptual dimensions are evaluated: clarity, fullness, brightness vs dullness, hardness/sharpness vs softness, spaciousness, nearness, extraneous sounds, loudness.
Visual analog scales (VAS) are used for each dimension and the patient has to score the dimension on a 10 cm VAS (between 0 to 10).
The test is performed with a direct audio link to the CI.
Time frame: at 2 months post-activation
The Gabrielsson scale (1988) is used to evaluate perceived sound quality as a multidimensional phenomenon, that is composed of a number of separate perceptual dimensions. Eight perceptual dimensions are evaluated: clarity, fullness, brightness vs dullness, hardness/sharpness vs softness, spaciousness, nearness, extraneous sounds, loudness.
Visual analog scales (VAS) are used for each dimension and the patient has to score the dimension on a 10 cm VAS (between 0 to 10).
The test is performed with a direct audio link to the CI.
Time frame: at 1 month post-activation
The Gabrielsson scale (1988) is used to evaluate perceived sound quality as a multidimensional phenomenon, that is composed of a number of separate perceptual dimensions. Eight perceptual dimensions are evaluated: clarity, fullness, brightness vs dullness, hardness/sharpness vs softness, spaciousness, nearness, extraneous sounds, loudness.
Visual analog scales (VAS) are used for each dimension and the patient has to score the dimension on a 10 cm VAS (between 0 to 10).
The test is performed in free field without any contralateral aid.
Time frame: at 2 months post-activation
The Gabrielsson scale (1988) is used to evaluate perceived sound quality as a multidimensional phenomenon, that is composed of a number of separate perceptual dimensions. Eight perceptual dimensions are evaluated: clarity, fullness, brightness vs dullness, hardness/sharpness vs softness, spaciousness, nearness, extraneous sounds, loudness.
Visual analog scales (VAS) are used for each dimension and the patient has to score the dimension on a 10 cm VAS (between 0 to 10).
The test is performed in free field without any contralateral aid.
Time frame: at 1 month post-activation
The speech recognition in quiet is evaluated with 3 monosyllabic list of 17 words at 60 dB SPL. The patient has to recognize 17 words and 51 phonemes. The words and phonemes are scored: each good answer is scored 1 yielding a total between 0 and 1 for the words and the phonemes (or 0% and 100%).
Time frame: at 2 months post-activation
The speech recognition in quiet is evaluated with 3 monosyllabic list of 17 words at 60 dB SPL. The patient has to recognize 17 words and 51 phonemes. The words and phonemes are scored: each good answer is scored 1 yielding a total between 0 and 1 for the words and the phonemes (or 0% and 100%).
Time frame: at 1 month post-activation
This test aimed to determine the smallest perceptible difference in F0 between two stimuli for various baseline values of F0. An adaptive procedure is used.
Time frame: at 2 months post-activation
This test aimed to determine the smallest perceptible difference in F0 between two stimuli for various baseline values of F0. An adaptive procedure is used.
Time frame: at 1 month post-activation
The HISQUI questionnaire will be used to evaluate the sound quality. The HISQUI questionnaire (Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index) is a questionnaire on the perceptual quality of sounds given a score (maximum=203) for each patient which indicates how he/she perceives the sound quality with his/her hearing implant in the everyday life.
Time frame: at 2 months post-activation
The HISQUI questionnaire will be used to evaluate the sound quality. The HISQUI questionnaire (Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index) is a questionnaire on the perceptual quality of sounds given a score (maximum=203) for each patient which indicates how he/she perceives the sound quality with his/her hearing implant in the everyday life.
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte GesmbH
Industry
Study of Musical Perception and Post-operative Auditory Performance as a Function of the Depth of Stimulation in Subjects Implanted With a MED-EL Cochlear Implant and Using a FineHearing Strategy Single-center Randomized Cross-over Study
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT05402813
AUNB1, Congenital Deafness
Paris, France
View Trial DetailsNCT06354010
Deafness, Ear Diseases
Tampa, Florida, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06723262
Ear Diseases, Hearing Disorders
Limoges, France
View Trial DetailsNCT06737185
Ear Diseases, Hearing Disorders
Dijon, France
View Trial Details