RP406 - Speech Recognition Outcomes for Adults with Asymmetric Hearing Loss Utilizing Different Treatment Options

Abstract:
Candidacy criteria for cochlear implantation have expanded to include patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). Adults with AHL who listen with a cochlear implant (CI) may experience better performance on spatial hearing tasks than when listening with technology that routes the received signal to the contralateral ear. The present study compared speech recognition in noise for adult CI users in an unaided condition, with re-routing technologies (i.e., bone conduction hearing aid or BiCROS), and with the CI.

Summary:
Objective/Rational
The present study compared speech recognition in noise for adult cochlear implant (CI) users with asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) in an unaided condition, with re-routing technologies (i.e., bone conduction hearing aid or BiCROS), and with the CI. Adults with AHL who listen with a CI may experience better performance on spatial hearing tasks than when listening with technology that routes the received signal to the contralateral ear. As CI candidacy criteria has expanded to include individuals with AHL, it is critical to explore their outcomes with a CI compared to other treatment options.

Design
Thirty adults with moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in one ear and mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (PTA 30-55 dB HL) in the contralateral ear participated in the study. Participants were evaluated in an unaided condition, with a BiCROS hearing aid (n=10) or a bone conduction hearing aid (n=20), and with the CI. Speech recognition was evaluated with recorded AzBio sentences in a 10-talker masker in three conditions: speech front noise directed to the CI (S0NCI), speech front noise directed to the contralateral ear (S0NContra), and speech and noise collocated from the front (S0N0). Participants were tested pre-operatively and 1-month and 12-months post-operatively.

Results
Participants experienced better performance on speech recognition in noise tasks with a CI at 12-months when compared to pre-operative abilities in the unaided condition or with re-routing technology.

Conclusion
Adults with AHL experienced better spatial hearing with a CI compared to alternative hearing technologies. This benefit is likely due to stimulation of both auditory pathways when listening with a CI.

Brief Summary of Clinical Takeaways:
The clinical takeway for this session is adults with AHL experienced better spatial hearing with a CI compared to alternative hearing technologies.