A study was carried out to determine which factors contributed to the vowel and consonant recognition ability of recipients of the 22-channel cochlear implant system. On the basis of the statistical analysis, no isolated factor showed a strong correlation with vowel recognition score. On the other hand, negative correlations were found between patients' consonant recognition scores and postoperative psychophysical percepts such as threshold levels and maximum comfortable loudness levels. However, multiple regression analysis also showed that the combination of lower threshold levels, a larger number of usable electrodes, and wider dynamic ranges contributed to higher consonant recognition scores.
DowellRCMecklenburgDJClarkGM. Speech recognition for 40 patients receiving multichannel cochlear implant. Cochlear implants. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg1986; 112: 1054–9.
2.
GantzBMcCabeBFTylerRSPreeceJP. Evaluation of four cochlear implant designs. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol1987; 96 (suppl 128): 145–7.
3.
DormanMFHannleyMTDankowskiK. Word recognition by 50 patients fitted with the Symbion multichannel cochlear implant. Ear Hear1989; 10: 44–9.
4.
MecklenburgDJBrimacombeJA. An overview of the Nucleus cochlear implant program. Semin Hear1985; 6: 41–51.
5.
GantzBJTylerRSKnutsonJF. Evaluation of five different cochlear implant designs: audiologic assessment and predictors of performance. Laryngoscope1988; 98: 1100–6.
6.
CooperH. The UCH/RNID cochlear implant: results in 30 cases and possible factors predictive of postoperative results. In: FraysseBCochardN, eds. Cochlear implant — acquisitions and controversies. Toulouse, France, 1989: 277–88.
OtteJSchuknechtHFKerrAG. Ganglion cell populations in normal and pathological human cochleae. Implications for cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope1978; 88: 1231–46.
9.
ClarkGMBlarneyPJBrownAM. The University of Melbourne—Nucleus multi-electrode cochlear implant. Adv Otorhinolaryngol1987; 38: 92.
10.
HolmesAEKemkerFJMerwinGE. The effects of varying the number of cochlear implant electrodes on speech perception. Am J Otol1988; 8: 240–6.
