Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-, Nasen- und Ohrenkrankheiten, plastische und ästhetische Operationen
Würzburg, Bavaria, 97080, Germany
NCT Number: NCT03861442
This study investigated the impact of Automatic Sound Management 3.0 (i.e. ambient noise reduction, transient noise reduction and an adaptive intelligence) as implemented in the SONNET2 on CI users' speech performance and their subjective quality of hearing and device handling.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Observational
Würzburg, Bavaria, 97080, Germany
MED-EL Cochlear Implants (CI) provide auditory sensations via electrical stimulation of the auditory pathways for severely to profoundly hearing-impaired individuals who obtain little or no benefit from acoustic amplification in the best aided condition. Front-end processing of acoustic signals picked up by the audio processor is routinely applied to provide optimal hearing performance under varying listening conditions. Automatic Sound Management (ASM) was introduced by MED-EL with the TEMPO+ audio processor and provided advanced compression and automatic gain management. With the SONNET audio processor, MED-EL introduced ASM 2.0, which added wind noise reduction and microphone directionality to the front-end processing. With the new SONNET2 audio processor, ASM 3.0 was implemented and the features ambient noise reduction, transient noise reduction and an adaptive intelligence (AI) were added.
This study investigated the impact of ASM 3.0 as implemented in the SONNET2 on CI users' speech performance and their subjective quality of hearing.
Subjects' speech performance was tested in quiet (Freiburg Monosyllables Test) and noise (OLSA) with the SONNET audio processor and the SONNNET 2 audio processor (OPUS 2 Configuration, SONNET Configuration, SONNET 2 Configurations 1-4). Additionally, quality of hearing with two questionnaires (HISQUI19, SSQ12) was evaluated with the subjects SONNET and the SONNET 2 configurations 1-4. Device handling with the SONNET and the SONNET 2 audio processor was investigated with a questionnaire (APSQ). Additionally, the data logging function of the SONNET2 audio processor was used to investigate differences in the use of the SONNET configuration and the SONNET 2 configurations 1-4. Subjects were asked to rate the SONNET 2 configurations 1-4 against the SONNET configuration with a product-specific SONNET2 questionnaires. Further, subjective sound quality was evaluated in different auditory settings and subjects' subjective listening effort was evaluated using the ACAES test with the SONNET 2 (OPUS configuration, SONNET configuration, SONNET 2 configuration 1&2).
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
AI - N/A, WNR - Mild, Beam-former - NAT, AGC Compression - 3:1, AGC Sensitivity - 75%, ANR - N/A, TNR - N/A
Other names: Default
AI - Off, WNR - Mild, Beam-former - NAT, AGC Compression - 3:1, AGC Sensitivity - 75%, ANR - Mild, TNR - Mild
AI - Off, WNR - Mild, Beam-former - NAT, AGC Compression - 3:1, AGC Sensitivity - 75%, ANR - Strong, TNR - Strong
AI - Mild, WNR - Mild, Beam-former - Auto (NAT), AGC Compression - 3:1, AGC Sensitivity - 75%, ANR - Auto (Off-Mild), TNR - Auto (Off-Mild)
AI - Strong, WNR - Strong, Beam-former - Auto (OMNI-ABF), AGC Compression - 3:1, AGC Sensitivity - 75%, ANR - Auto (Off-Strong), TNR - Auto (Off-Strong)
AI - Off, WNR - Off, Beam-former - OMNI, AGC Compression - 3:1, AGC Sensitivity - 75%, ANR - N/A, TNR - N/A
AI - Off, WNR - Mild, Beam-former - NAT, AGC Compression - 3:1, AGC Sensitivity - 75%, ANR - N/A, TNR - N/A
Time frame: 8 weeks
Oldenburg Sentence Test in noise (S0N0)
Time frame: 8 weeks
Freiburg Monosyllabic test in quiet
Time frame: 8 weeks
Oldenburg Sentence Test in noise (S0N0)
Time frame: 8 weeks
Oldenburg Sentence Test in noise (S0N0T0)
Time frame: 8 weeks
Oldenburg Sentence Test in noise (S0, ±N45, ± N135)
Time frame: 8 weeks
Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index
Time frame: 8 weeks
Questionnaire: The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12; short version, 12 items) with a scale range 0 (worst) to 10 (best)
Time frame: 8 weeks
Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ) with a scale range 0 (worst) to 10 (best)
Time frame: 8 weeks
Adaptive CAtegorical Listening Effort Scaling (ACALES); Subjectively perceived listening Effort is evaluated using a 14-step scale contains eight labelled categories (from "effortless" to "extremely strenuous" and "noise only")
Time frame: 8 weeks
Subjective Sound Quality Rating
Time frame: 8 weeks
A product specific questionnaire will be used to gain user satisfaction on the new audio processor and individual setting preferences
Time frame: 8 weeks
Data Logging
Time frame: 8 weeks
Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index 19 (HISQUI19) with a 7-point rating scale (never to always)
MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte GesmbH
Industry
Front-End Processing 3.0 - Noise Reduction, Transient Reduction, Scene Classifier
Acronym: FEP3
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.
NCT06176625
Behavior, Behavioral Symptoms
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05855005
Ear Diseases, Hearing Disorders
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04427033
Ear Diseases, Hearing Disorders
Innsbruck, Austria
View Trial DetailsNCT06058767
Ear Diseases, Hearing Disorders
San Francisco, California, United States
View Trial Details