Abstract
Purpose Cochlear implant (CI) recipients often experience speech recognition difficulty in noise in small group settings with multiple talkers. In traditional remote microphones systems, one talker wears a remote microphone that wirelessly delivers speech to the CI processor. This system will not transmit signals from multiple talkers in a small group. However, remote microphone systems with multiple microphones allowing for adaptive beamforming may be beneficial for small group situations with multiple talkers. Specifically, a remote microphone with an adaptive multiple-microphone beamformer may be placed in the center of the small group, and the beam (i.e., polar lobe) may be automatically steered toward the direction associated with the most favorable speech-to-noise ratio. The signal from the remote microphone can then be wirelessly delivered to the CI sound processor. Alternately, each of the talkers in a small group may use a remote microphone that is part of a multi-talker network that wirelessly delivers the remote microphone signal to the CI sound processor. The purpose of this study was to compare the potential benefit of an adaptive multiple-microphone beamformer remote microphone system and a multi-talker network remote microphone system.
Method Twenty recipients, ages 12 to 84 years, with Advanced Bionics CIs completed sentence-recognition-in-noise tasks while seated at a desk surrounded by three loudspeakers at 0, 90, and 270 degrees. These speakers randomly presented the target speech while competing noise was presented from four loudspeakers located in the corners of the room. Testing was completed in three conditions: 1) CI alone, 2) Remote microphone system with an adaptive multiple-microphone beamformer, and 3) and a multi-talker network remote microphone system each with five different signal levels (15 total conditions).
Results Significant differences were found across all signal levels and technology conditions. Relative to the CI alone, sentence recognition improvements ranged from 14–23 percentage points with the adaptive multiple-microphone beamformer and 27–47 percentage points with the multi-talker network with superior performance for the latter remote microphone system.
Conclusions Both remote microphone systems significantly improved speech recognition in noise of CI recipients when listening in small group settings, but the multi-talker network provided superior performance.
Keywords
cochlear implants - hearing assistive technology - speech recognition - remote microphone system - adaptive multiple-microphone beamformer - multi-talker network - small group
