Bicentric study analyzes speech perception outcomes related to electrical dynamic range in adult cochlear implant users, indicating clinical implications.
Objectives: To analyze speech perception outcomes of a cohort of experienced adult cochlear implant (CI) users to explore whether there is a correlation with electrical dynamic range (EDR) parameters, and to describe speech intelligibility curve morphology according to the degree of CI performance. Methods: A bicentric retrospective observational study. Data were extracted from a cochlear implantation database from a total of 36 CI users implanted with Advanced Bionics devices. Results: Mean age at implantation was 56.61 years. In the majority of cases, hearing loss onset was more than 15 years before implantation (80.55%), and only 11.11% of cases preserved residual hearing. This resulted in a significant relationship between speech therapy and better speech recognition (p = 0.044). At the same time, no correlation was found between age, duration of deafness before implantation, and maximum speech perception achieved (p > 0.05). Mean speech audiometry curves displayed a roll-over phenomenon in poor performers and a plateau effect in average performers. In contrast, the mean curve of high performers exhibited a steeper morphology (p < 0.0001). Speech recognition threshold (SRT) and word recognition score (WRS) were predictors of speech audiogram curves (p = 0.006). No direct correlation was found between the mean T-level, M-level, dynamic range, and maximum recognition score, even after clustering electrodes by position along the cochlea (p > 0.05). Conclusions: EDR parameters did not emerge as independent predictors of speech recognition outcomes within this specific cohort. Speech therapy and rehabilitative efforts showed a significant relationship with improved performance, and speech audiogram curve morphology may offer a more specific clinical tool for assessing global CI performance. Further prospective studies with larger, more homogenous populations are required to validate these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salvago et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: