Pupillometry Assessment of Speech Recognition and Listening Experience in Adult Cochlear Implant Patients.
cochlear implant
listening effort
pupil dilatation
pupillometery
speech in noise
Journal
Frontiers in neuroscience
ISSN: 1662-4548
Titre abrégé: Front Neurosci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101478481
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
28
04
2020
accepted:
29
09
2020
entrez:
26
11
2020
pubmed:
27
11
2020
medline:
27
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of the present study was to investigate the pupillary response to word identification in cochlear implant (CI) patients. Authors hypothesized that when task difficulty (i.e., addition of background noise) increased, pupil dilation markers such as the peak dilation or the latency of the peak dilation would increase in CI users, as already observed in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Pupillometric measures in 10 CI patients were combined to standard speech recognition scores used to evaluate CI outcomes, namely, speech audiometry in quiet and in noise at +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The main outcome measures of pupillometry were mean pupil dilation, maximal pupil dilation, dilation latency, and mean dilation during return to baseline or retention interval. Subjective hearing quality was evaluated by means of one self-reported fatigue questionnaire, and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities (SSQ) of Hearing scale. All pupil dilation data were transformed to percent change in event-related pupil dilation (ERPD, %). Analyses show that the peak amplitudes for both mean pupil dilation and maximal pupil dilation were higher during the speech-in-noise test. Mean peak dilation was measured at 3.47 ± 2.29% noise vs. 2.19 ± 2.46 in quiet and maximal peak value was detected at 9.17 ± 3.25% in noise vs. 8.72 ± 2.93% in quiet. Concerning the questionnaires, the mean pupil dilation during the retention interval was significantly correlated with the spatial subscale score of the SSQ Hearing scale [ The analysis of pupillometric traces, obtained during speech audiometry in quiet and in noise in CI users, provided interesting information about the different processes engaged in this task. Pupillometric measures could be indicative of listening difficulty, phoneme intelligibility, and were correlated with general hearing experience as evaluated by the SSQ of Hearing scale. These preliminary results show that pupillometry constitutes a promising tool to improve objective quantification of CI performance in clinical settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33240035
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.556675
pmc: PMC7677588
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
556675Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Russo, Hoen, Karoui, Demarcy, Ardoint, Tuset, De Seta, Sterkers, Lahlou and Mosnier.
Références
Ear Hear. 2016 Jul-Aug;37 Suppl 1:5S-27S
pubmed: 27355771
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013 Aug;56(4):1075-84
pubmed: 23275424
Trends Hear. 2019 Jan-Dec;23:2331216519887815
pubmed: 31775578
Ear Hear. 2016 Jul-Aug;37 Suppl 1:92S-100S
pubmed: 27355776
Front Psychol. 2016 Mar 30;7:398
pubmed: 27065901
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013 Aug;56(4):1156-65
pubmed: 23785182
Ear Hear. 2010 Aug;31(4):480-90
pubmed: 20588118
Otol Neurotol. 2013 Dec;34(9):1622-9
pubmed: 24005165
Ear Hear. 2015 Jul-Aug;36(4):e153-65
pubmed: 25654299
Otol Neurotol. 2017 Sep;38(8):e282-e284
pubmed: 28806339
Int J Audiol. 2015;54(12):889-98
pubmed: 26140297
Cochlear Implants Int. 2013 Jun;14(3):121-9
pubmed: 23540588
BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord. 2017 Nov 28;17:10
pubmed: 29209150
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Aug;99:1-7
pubmed: 28688548
Ear Hear. 2018 May/Jun;39(3):470-474
pubmed: 29095240
Trends Hear. 2018 Jan-Dec;22:2331216518808962
pubmed: 30375282
Ear Hear. 2016 Nov/Dec;37(6):e377-e390
pubmed: 27438871
Nat Commun. 2017 Mar 03;8:14637
pubmed: 28256514
Semin Hear. 2015 Aug;36(3):122-39
pubmed: 27516713
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Feb 25;173(4):293-9
pubmed: 23337978
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 10;10(2):e0117611
pubmed: 25668423
Audiology. 1997 May-Jun;36(3):155-64
pubmed: 9193733
J Acoust Soc Am. 2015 Aug;138(2):571-4
pubmed: 26328675
Ear Hear. 2017 Jan/Feb;38(1):e39-e48
pubmed: 27541332
Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016;894:297-306
pubmed: 27080670
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 18;11(4):e0153566
pubmed: 27089436
Trends Hear. 2016 Oct 3;20:
pubmed: 27698260
Science. 1966 Dec 23;154(3756):1583-5
pubmed: 5924930
Can J Exp Psychol. 1993 Jun;47(2):310-39
pubmed: 8364533
Int J Audiol. 2013 Jul;52(7):433-41
pubmed: 23550584
Psychol Bull. 1982 Mar;91(2):276-92
pubmed: 7071262
Trends Hear. 2018 Jan-Dec;22:2331216518800869
pubmed: 30261825
Ear Hear. 2012 Mar-Apr;33(2):291-300
pubmed: 21921797
Int J Audiol. 2004 Feb;43(2):85-99
pubmed: 15035561
Brain Lang. 1986 May;28(1):1-11
pubmed: 3719292
Hear Res. 2015 May;323:81-90
pubmed: 25732724
J Acoust Soc Am. 2015 Sep;138(3):EL187-92
pubmed: 26428811
Laryngoscope. 2017 May;127 Suppl 1:S4-S11
pubmed: 28409842
Hear Res. 2014 Jan;307:16-28
pubmed: 23895875
Ear Hear. 2011 Jul-Aug;32(4):498-510
pubmed: 21233711
Ear Hear. 2018 Mar/Apr;39(2):204-214
pubmed: 28938250
Trends Hear. 2018 Jan-Dec;22:2331216518777174
pubmed: 30249172
Trends Hear. 2019 Jan-Dec;23:2331216519845596
pubmed: 31131729
Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2017 Jun 21;3(3):410-415
pubmed: 29067347
Psychophysiology. 2013 Jan;50(1):23-34
pubmed: 23157603
Ear Hear. 2016 Jul-Aug;37 Suppl 1:126S-35S
pubmed: 27355762
Age Ageing. 2015 Nov;44(6):1000-5
pubmed: 26464420
Audiol Neurootol. 2013;18(3):171-83
pubmed: 23548561
Ear Hear. 2018 May/Jun;39(3):573-582
pubmed: 29117062
Hear Res. 2018 Sep;367:106-112
pubmed: 30096490
Ear Hear. 2016 Jul-Aug;37 Suppl 1:136S-44S
pubmed: 27355763
Hear Res. 2007 Jul;229(1-2):132-47
pubmed: 17317056
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2011 Oct;66(10):1131-6
pubmed: 21768501
Hear Res. 2014 Jun;312:114-20
pubmed: 24709275