A music quality rating test battery for cochlear implant users to compare the FSP and HDCIS strategies for music appreciation

Abstract

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop a music quality rating test battery (MQRTB) and pilot test it by comparing appraisal ratings from cochlear implant (CI) recipients using the fine-structure processing (FSP) and high-definition continuous interleaved sampling (HDCIS) speech processing strategies. Design: The development of the MQRTB involved three stages: (1) Selection of test items for the MQRTB; (2) Verification of its length and complexity with normally-hearing individuals; and (3) Pilot testing with CI recipients. Study Sample: Part 1 involved 65 adult listeners, Part 2 involved 10 normally-hearing adults, and Part 3 involved five adult MED-EL CI recipients. Results: The MQRTB consisted of ten songs, with ratings made on scales assessing pleasantness, naturalness, richness, fullness, sharpness, and roughness. Results of the pilot study, which compared FSP and HDCIS for music, indicated that acclimatization to a strategy had a significant effect on ratings (p < 0.05). When acclimatized to FSP, the group rated FSP as closer to ‘exactly as I want it to sound’ than HDCIS (p < 0.05), and that HDCIS sounded significantly sharper and rougher than FSP. However when acclimatized to HDCIS, there were no significant differences between ratings. There was no effect of song familiarity or genre on ratings. Conclusions: Overall the results suggest that the use of FSP as the default strategy for MED-EL recipients would have a positive effect on music appreciation, and that the MQRTB is an effective tool for assessing music sound quality.

Sumario

Objetivo: El propósito de este estudio fue desarrollar una batería de pruebas de clasificación de la calidad musical (MQRTB) y hacer una prueba piloto comparando los índices de valoración de usuarios de implante coclear (CI) con el uso de dos estrategias de procesamiento del lenguaje: la de Procesamiento de Estructuras Finas (FSP) y la de Muestras Intercaladas continuas de Alta Definición (Continua) (HDCIS). Diseño: El desarrollo de la Batería MQRTB comprendió tres etapas: (1) Selección de ítems de prueba para la MQRTB; (2) Verificación de su extensión y complejidad con individuos normoyentes; y (3) Prueba Piloto con usuarios de CI. Muestra de Estudio: Parte 1: comprendió 65 escuchas adultos; Parte 2: comprendió a 10 adultos normoyentes y Parte 3: comprendió a 5 adultos, usuarios de CI MED-EL. Resultados: El MQRTB consistió en 10 canciones, para las cuales se establecieron escalas con sus índices de agrado, naturalidad, plenitud, precisión y aspereza. Los resultados del estudio piloto los cuales compararon FSP y HDCIS para música, indicaron que la aclimatación a una estrategia tenía un efecto significativo en las evaluaciones (p < 0.05). Con aclimatación a FSP, el grupo clasificó la FSP mas cerca a lo que ‘exactamente quiero que suene’ que con HDCIS (p < 0.05), y que la HDCIS sonaba significativamente más precisa y áspera que la FSP. No obstante, con aclimatación a HDCIS, no existieron diferencias significativas en las evaluaciones. No hubo ningún efecto en las evaluaciones a partir de la familiaridad de la canción o a partir del género. Conclusiones: Globalmente, los resultados sugieren que el uso de FSP como estrategia sin otras alternativas, para los usuarios de MED-EL, puede tener un efecto positivo en la apreciación de la música y que la MQRTB es una herramienta efectiva para evaluar la calidad de los sonidos musicales.

Key Words::

• Cochlear implants
• Music
• Quality ratings
• Speech processing strategy
• Perceptual test

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Gregor Dittrich for his support, advice, and assistance, Dr. Greg O'Beirne for writing the touchscreen program used in this study, Dr. Emily Lin and Peter Smith for statistical advice, Dr. Peter Nopp and Andreas Krenmayr for technical advice, and Uta Heidtke for assistance with the MQRTB development. Appreciation is also extended to the staff at the Southern Cochlear Implant Programme (Leonard Healy, Beth Kempen, Penny Monteath) and the Lions Hearing Clinic, as well as all of the participants for their time and efforts.

Declaration of interest: Although this study was funded by MED-EL GmbH and the third author is an employee of this company, this in no way affected the conduct, outcomes, or reporting of this study. There was no financial or other incentive provided to the authors or any other third party at any stage of the research, and the company did not in any way influence the results obtained, the interpretation of the results, the writing of the manuscript, nor the decisions related to publication. Financial support was only provided to cover exact travel costs for the researcher and participants, and the supply of clinical equipment required for the study.

This research has been presented at (1) The 11th International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Related Sciences. Stockholm, Sweden. 29 June –1 July, 2010; and (2) The 7th Asia Pacific Symposium on Cochlear Implants and Related Sciences. Singapore, 1–4 Dec, 2009.