REVIEW PAPER
NEW SOLUTIONS FOR HIGH-FREQUENCY HEARING IMPAIRMENT
 
More details
Hide details
1
The Bionics Institute of Australia
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Hugh J. McDermott   

Hugh J. McDermott, The Bionics Institute of Australia, 384-388 Albert St., East Melbourne, VIC 3002, Australia, Phone: +61 3 9667 7526, Fax: +61 3 9667 7505, e-mail: hmcdermott@bionicsinstitute.org
Publication date: 2020-04-20
 
J Hear Sci 2012;2(1):17–22
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The common observation that hearing impairment tends to affect sound perception at high frequencies more than at lower ones has led recently to the development and evaluation of a number of innovative signal-processing techniques. These include frequency-lowering schemes that aim to provide improved audibility and discriminability of sound components by shifting them into a frequency range where the listener has less impairment. For people who have usable low-frequency hearing, but insufficient high-frequency hearing for effective use of a frequency-lowering hearing instrument, cochlear implantation is rapidly becoming a well-accepted option. The use of a cochlear implant, in combination with an acoustic hearing aid either in the implanted ear or the opposite ear, can provide large perceptual benefits, especially for understanding speech in noise and for listening to music. Selecting and fitting the most appropriate configuration of hearing devices is critical in maximising the perceptual benefits for both children and adults with severe high-frequency hearing impairment.
 
REFERENCES (12)
1.
Moore BCJ: Dead regions in the cochlea: Diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing aids. Trends Amplif, 2001; 5(1): 1–34.
 
2.
Glista D, Scollie S, Bagatto M et al: Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression: Clinical outcomes. Int J Audiol, 2009; 48(9): 632–44.
 
3.
Kuk F, Keenan D, Korhonen P, Lau C-c: Efficacy of linear frequency transposition on consonant identification in quiet and in noise. J Am Acad Audiol, 2009; 20(8): 465–79.
 
4.
Helms J, Weichbold V, Baumann U et al: Analysis of ceiling effects occurring with speech recognition tests in adult cochlear-implanted patients. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec, 2004; 66(3): 130–35.
 
5.
McDermott HJ: Music perception with cochlear implants: A review. Trends Amplif, 2004; 8(2): 49–82.
 
6.
Ching TY, van Wanrooy E, Dillon H: Binaural-bimodal fitting or bilateral implantation for managing severe to profound deafness: A review. Trends Amplif, 2007; 11(3): 161–92.
 
7.
McDermott HJ: Cochlear implants and music. In: Chasin M (ed.), Hearing Loss in Musicians, Prevention and Management. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing, 2009; 117–27.
 
8.
Blamey P, Saunders E: A review of bimodal binaural hearing systems and fitting. Acoustics Australia, 2008; 36(3): 87–91.
 
9.
Gantz BJ, Hansen MR, Turner CW et al: Hybrid 10 clinical trial. Audiol Neurotol, 2009;14(Suppl.1): 32–38.
 
10.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Podskarbi-Fayette R: Results of partial deafness cochlear implantation using various electrode designs. Audiol Neurotol, 2009; 14(Suppl.1): 39–45.
 
11.
Prentiss S, Sykes K, Staecker H: Partial deafness cochlear implantation at the University of Kansas: Techniques and outcomes. J Am Acad Audiol, 2010; 21: 197–203.
 
12.
McDermott HJ: A technical comparison of digital frequencylowering algorithms available in two current hearing aids. PLoS ONE 2011; 6(7): e22358. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022358.