Re: Only 13 electrodes not 24

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/15/2003 7:05:26 AM Pacific Standard Time,

steven197120032000@... writes:

The audiologist also said that my hearing is good as with 24 electrodes.Is

that true or not? Maybe the audiologist was just giving me the confident about

myself on hearing performance.

I thought the most they offers is 22. My audie told me that no one use all

22, some use only 8 some use 15, it all depends on each person's needs.

Lee

[Guest guest]

Hi Steve!

This is just my opinion, okay? It does not really matter what

your audiologist says. What is important is how you feel about how

you are doing in real life situations! You could be doing as well

with less electrodes as you would have with all 24 or 22. The real

satisfaction comes from how you feel you are doing and not what some

audie says you are doing. When I got implanted, all I wanted was

for it to eventually be better than any hearing aid has ever given me

and it is so I'm very happy. And it sounds like you are doing

fantastic!!! Wow, you're understanding somewhat on the phone!

Congratulations to you. Continued success to you!

Velma

N24C 11/25/02 (What A Day!)

Hook Up Day BWP 1/2/03 (A Happy Day!)

3G 1/31/03 (An Even Happier Day!)

" The audiologist also said that my hearing is good as with 24

electrodes.Is that true or not? Maybe the audiologist was just

giving me the confident about myself on hearing performance. "

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Steve,

steven smith wrote:

> I have got a ci with only 13 electrodes not

> 24 because of my deformed cochlear. The

> audiologist said that I,m going really well

> on hearing tests and homeworks as I only got ci switched on 5 and

> half months ago. I can now hear half of the words right on the

> phone. The audiologist also said that my hearing is good as with 24

> electrodes.Is that true or not?

I read few years ago that the results become good with a minimum of 8

stimulation channels. You can read the abstract here :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & dopt=Abstra\

ct & list_uids=98009317

If the line is splitted, copy and paste the segments to rebuild the URL, or

try this link :

http://minilien.com/?W0K1aVzauy

Moreover, according to http://www.utdallas.edu/~thib/pah/internal_ci.htm the

Clarion uses two electrodes per channel (16 electrodes => 8 channels) while

the Nucleus uses only one electrode per channel. As Clarion users have also

very good results with only 8 channels, you should not worry about your 13

electrodes !

Since you were switched on less than 6 months ago ! I think you are doing

great :-)

I have been implanted in 2001 and it took 9 months before being able to use

the phone again. Now, I use it everyday.

Marc

Toulouse, France

--

[Guest guest]

Dear Marc:

I read your E regarding the number of electrodes an IMPLANT may or may

not use. I was also most interested in your article you had forwarded as well.

I'm saving both your E and your link. I'm forwarding them on to my

Audiologist whom I see in just about two, (2) weeks here. I'm always interested

information and I do like to run things by her for acursey in order that ti

don't

pass on inaccurate information.

If your interested in the results she gives me? I'd be most happy to supply

that for you. If not? I'll not bother to save it for you, but just in my

personal files instead.

You take care and it is wonderful to hear your doing so utterly well.

Particularly with your specific hearing problems you mentioned.

I wear the NUCLEUS 24 3G BTE.The twenty-four stands for the 22 normal

electrodes and the two main ones that most don't offer you and that Nucleus

didn't

bother with until their release of the Nuc 24 3G. Nucleus Cochlear original

was the Nuc. 22 and it has served it's patients well and thus, I figured with

that? I'd go with them. Not for any other reason then that mainly, because I

believe everyone has different needs and therefore, they may require different

companies.

Please do let me know if you would like me to forward on to you my

Audiologist's response to me? Oh, the phone. I'm using the T-COIL all the time

and

what is really funny is that the majority of those I speak with I need my

cordless phone, but a few I can't hear at all unless I use the speaker phone. I

believe it is due to their low voices. However, I believe that each and every

one

of us must be very proud of their success, because each of us really shine

and without even one of us. The star would go out. So I'm so delighted for the

wonderful group of people whom wear the CI now no matter what it is: 1.

CLARION

2. NUCLEUS COCHLEAR

3. MED-EL.

I do hope your weekend is swimming in nothing, but positive hearing and may

all your sounds be happy, positive ones only!

Take care:

Felicity:

[Guest guest]

Marc,

Your second reference is outdated. There have been a lot of

developments since it was last updated in May, 2000. The Clarion CII

has 16 electrodes and can use either 16 or 8 channels depending on the

speech processing strategy.

Fisk

Atlanta, GA

CII 4/25/03, hook-up 5/27/03, HiRes 6/25/03

[Guest guest]

,

You are right, the Clarion can use 16 channels with the latest speech

processing strategies.

But this does not change the fact that a very high number of channel is not

required to get good speech understanding. I just found another recent

interesting paper :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=1\

2476091 & dopt=Abstract

http://minilien.com/?85pVufHGah

Another interesting data is that using more channel does not always mean

better results. For some people, it is true, but for others it means worse

results :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=1\

2701728 & dopt=Abstract

http://minilien.com/?qpdJx6JBYw

It is similar for stimulation rate. My implant is a Nucleus 24 that can do

14400 pulses/second. I remember that I was alway looking at my number of

pulse per second during mapping sessions. Being an engineer, I was not

understanding why my stimulation rate was never set to the maximal value

supported by my device :-)

But one day, I found that a new map I was testing was notably better than

the previous one. I asked to my audiologist what was the difference, and she

said that she only lowered the stimulation rate. It helped me to understand

that medecine is very different from electronics engineering ...

Marc

N24C+SPrint since 01/2001

Toulouse, France

--

[Guest guest]

Marc,

Thanks for the two references. They are quite interesting, as is your

experience with the stimulation rate decrease. I'm not an engineer, but

would also tend to think a higher stimulation rate would be better. But

that doesn't seem to be the case in practice. Maybe playing with the

number of electrodes/stim rate I'm using would help me understand speech

better, as I'm still struggling after 6 months. I'm going to talk to my

audi about it.

Thanks again,

Fisk

Atlanta, GA

CII 4/25/03, hook-up 5/27/03, HiRes 6/25/03

-----Original Message-----

I just found another recent interesting paper :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & lis

t_uids=12476091 & dopt=Abstract

http://minilien.com/?85pVufHGah

Another interesting data is that using more channel does not always mean

better results. For some people, it is true, but for others it means

worse results :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & lis

t_uids=12701728 & dopt=Abstract

http://minilien.com/?qpdJx6JBYw

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/17/2003 11:42:10 PM Eastern Standard Time,

mefisk@... writes:

I'm not an engineer, but

would also tend to think a higher stimulation rate would be better.

I am curious to know why someone would assume that. I am another person for

whom faster is not better!!

[Guest guest]

, You don't feel that someone should assume that fast is better, by

assuming yourself that faster is not better?

If I am allowed to assume, I would assume it is best to have the chance to try

the full range of speeds, then decide what works for you as an individual. May I

assume that makes sense?

Ralph CII 8/01

HiRes 2/03

I am curious to know why someone would assume that. I am another person for

whom faster is not better!!

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/18/2003 10:11:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,

ralph.chiaradia@... writes:

, You don't feel that someone should assume that fast is better, by

assuming yourself that faster is not better?

I never said that I assumed that faster is NOT better. When I got my

implant, it was all a toss-up...just like it is now. We just never know what

will

work best for each of us. But to assume that ONLY faster is better is a mistake

in my opinion...the same way it would be a mistake to assume that ONLY slower

is better.

[Guest guest]

,

I'm a computer programmer by trade, so I think very logically. To me,

it seems logical that a higher stimulation rate would capture more of

any given sound, since it is sampling the sound at a faster rate. Thus,

the brain would get a sound that is closer to " natural " sound. But, two

important notes on this assumption:

1. Since I'm not an engineer, I have no idea whether a faster

stimulation rate actually results in a closer approximation to " natural "

sound actually being produced by the CI.

2. A faster stimulation rate obviously isn't better in practice for

every user.

I just meant this as a kind of scientific hypothesis, to be proven or

disproved in actual use by each individual. Since I favored SAS over

CIS and MPS, and HiRes over SAS, it does seem to be true for me.

Although it could be something entirely different than the stimulation

rate that makes each strategy sound so different for me. Who knows?

Whatever works for each of us is what's better!