Ordóñez-Ordóñez LE, Osorio-Mejía F, Garcia-Rey T, González-Saboya CP, Medina-Parra J, Ortiz-Obando JA, Hernández AC, Sierra-Sandoval MM, Vanegas SC, González-Marín N

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 62-68
PDF size: 169.40 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate the differences in musical perception between electrical and acoustic sound stimulation. Materials and methods: Adult patients with unilateral cochlear implant, healthy or mild hearing loss in the contralateral ear and rehabilitation time greater than 12 months were evaluated. Musical recognition scales, quality of life Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and identification of tone, rhythm, instruments, and songs were applied. Results and conclusions: 6 patients were collected, ages between 37-73 years, healthy ear with a pure tone average (PTA) ‹40 dB, speech discrimination score (SDS): 100 % without changes in the postoperative period. The Implanted ear with average PTA between 40–58.3 dB and SDS between 70-90 % post-implantation. The GBI scale was applied where most of the patients obtained positive results, with a range between +41 and -13. Most of the patients improved the frequency of music-listening after implantation (4/6 patients). Half of the patients reported improvement in the role music plays in their lives. In the recognition of the tone and rhythm in the implanted ear, similar results were found after the implantation with respect to the healthy ear, with medians of 17/20 vs. 16/20 in tonal patterns and 18.5/20 vs. 18/20 in rhythmic patterns. The recognition of the songs was better with the lyrics than without the lyrics in the implanted ear, with medians of 8/8 vs. 7/8. The recognition of instruments in the implanted ear was 4.5/8 vs. 7.5/8 in the healthy ear.

REFERENCES

1. Harris RL, Gibson WP, Johnson M, Brew J, Bray M, PsarrosC. Intra-individual assessment of speech and music perceptionin cochlear implant users with contralateral Cochlear™ andMED-EL™ systems. Acta Otolaryngol. 2011;131(12):1270-1278. doi:10.3109/00016489.2011.616225

2. Manrique M, Ramos A, Vernetta CA, Gil-Carcedo E, LassaletaL, Sánchez-Cuadrado I, et al. Guía clínica sobre implantescocleares. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.otorri.2017.10.007

3. Lassaletta L, Castro A, Bastarrica M, Pérez-Mora R, Herrán B,Sanz L, et al. Percepción y disfrute de la música en pacientesposlocutivos con implante coclear. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp.2008;59(5):228–34. doi: 10.1016/S0001-6519(08)73300-4

4. Kong YY, Cruz R, Jones JA, Zeng FG. Music perceptionwith temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. Ear Hear.2004;25(2):173-185. doi:10.1097/01.aud.0000120365.97792.2f

5. Fujita S, Ito J. Ability of nucleus cochlear implantees torecognize music. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1999;108(7 Pt1):634- 640. doi:10.1177/000348949910800702

6. Gfeller K, Lansing CR. Melodic, rhythmic, and timbralperception of adult cochlear implant users. J Speech Hear Res.1991;34(4):916- 920. doi:10.1044/jshr.3404.916

7. Brockmeier SJ, Fuster A. Cuestionario Música de Munich[Internet]. MED-EL. [acceso 19 de mayo de 2020]. Disponibleen: https://s3.medel.com/downloadmanager/downloads/bridge_us/Music_Listening/en-US/MUMU_Questionnaire_ES.pdf

8. Sánchez-Cuadrado IP. Validación de los cuestionarios de calidadde vida “Glasgow Benefit Inventory” y “Nijmegen CochlearImplant Questionnaire” en pacientes con implante coclear [tesis].Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; 2015.

9. Buyens W, van Dijk B, Moonen M, Wouters J. Music mixingpreferences of cochlear implant recipients: a pilot study. Int J Audiol.2014;53(5):294- 301. doi:10.3109/14992027.2013.873955

10. Buchman CA, Dillon MT, King ER, Adunka MC, Adunka OF,Pillsbury HC. Influence of cochlear implant insertion depth onperformance: a prospective randomized trial. Otol Neurotol.2014;35(10):1773- 1779. doi:10.1097/MAO.0000000000000541

11. David D, Werner P. Stigma regarding hearing loss and hearingaids: A scoping review. Stigma and Health. 2016;1(2):59–71.doi: 10.1037/sah0000022