Supplementary Material for: Acceptance and Benefits of Electro-Acoustic Stimulation for Conventional-Length Electrode Arrays
datasetposted on 28.07.2020 by Spitzer E.R., Waltzman S.B., Landsberger D.M., Friedmann D.R.
Datasets usually provide raw data for analysis. This raw data often comes in spreadsheet form, but can be any collection of data, on which analysis can be performed.
Background: Prior studies have shown an advantage for electro-acoustic stimulation (EAS) in cochlear implant (CI) patients with residual hearing, but the degree of benefit can vary. The objective was to explore which factors relate to performance with and acceptance of EAS for CI users with conventional-length electrodes. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted for adults with an average threshold of 75 dB hearing loss or better across 250 and 500 Hz preoperatively (n = 83). All patients underwent cochlear implantation with a conventional-length electrode. Low-frequency audiometric thresholds were measured at initial activation as well as 3 and 12 months postoperatively to determine who met the criteria for EAS. Speech perception for CNC words and AzBio sentences in quiet and +10 dB SNR noise was evaluated 3 and 12 months after activation. Results: Speech perception in quiet and noise was similar regardless of whether or not the patient was eligible for EAS. Less than half of the patients who met the EAS criteria chose to use it, citing reasons such as physical discomfort or lack of perceived benefit. EAS users performed better on CNC words but not sentence recognition than EAS nonusers. Conclusions: EAS use is dependent on audiologic and nonaudiologic issues. Hearing preservation is possible with conventional electrodes, but hearing preservation alone does not guarantee superior speech perception.