{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01519213583556747, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01459636580280012, 'mean_word_length': 5.335849056603774, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Verification of a Proposed Clinical Electroacoustic Test Protocol for Personal Digital Modulation Receivers Coupled to Cochlear Implant Sound Processors.

BACKGROUND
Guidelines established by the AAA currently recommend behavioral testing when fitting frequency modulated (FM) systems to individuals with cochlear implants (CIs). A protocol for completing electroacoustic measures has not yet been validated for personal FM systems or digital modulation (DM) systems coupled to CI sound processors. In response, some professionals have used or altered the AAA electroacoustic verification steps for fitting FM systems to hearing aids when fitting FM systems to CI sound processors. More recently steps were outlined in a proposed protocol.


PURPOSE
The purpose of this research is to review and compare the electroacoustic test measures outlined in a 2013 article by Schafer and colleagues in the Journal of the American Academy of Audiology titled "A Proposed Electroacoustic Test Protocol for Personal FM Receivers Coupled to Cochlear Implant Sound Processors" to the AAA electroacoustic verification steps for fitting FM systems to hearing aids when fitting DM systems to CI users.


RESEARCH DESIGN
Electroacoustic measures were conducted on 71 CI sound processors and Phonak Roger DM systems using a proposed protocol and an adapted AAA protocol. Phonak's recommended default receiver gain setting was used for each CI sound processor manufacturer and adjusted if necessary to achieve transparency.


STUDY SAMPLE
Electroacoustic measures were conducted on Cochlear and Advanced Bionics (AB) sound processors. In this study, 28 Cochlear Nucleus 5/CP810 sound processors, 26 Cochlear Nucleus 6/CP910 sound processors, and 17 AB Naida CI Q70 sound processors were coupled in various combinations to Phonak Roger DM dedicated receivers (25 Phonak Roger 14 receivers-Cochlear dedicated receiver-and 9 Phonak Roger 17 receivers-AB dedicated receiver) and 20 Phonak Roger Inspiro transmitters.


DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Employing both the AAA and the Schafer et al protocols, electroacoustic measurements were conducted with the Audioscan Verifit in a clinical setting on 71 CI sound processors and Phonak Roger DM systems to determine transparency and verify FM advantage, comparing speech inputs (65 dB SPL) in an effort to achieve equal outputs. If transparency was not achieved at Phonak's recommended default receiver gain, adjustments were made to the receiver gain. The integrity of the signal was monitored with the appropriate manufacturer's monitor earphones.


RESULTS
Using the AAA hearing aid protocol, 50 of the 71 CI sound processors achieved transparency, and 59 of the 71 CI sound processors achieved transparency when using the proposed protocol at Phonak's recommended default receiver gain. After the receiver gain was adjusted, 3 of 21 CI sound processors still did not meet transparency using the AAA protocol, and 2 of 12 CI sound processors still did not meet transparency using the Schafer et al proposed protocol.


CONCLUSIONS
Both protocols were shown to be effective in taking reliable electroacoustic measurements and demonstrate transparency. Both protocols are felt to be clinically feasible and to address the needs of populations that are unable to reliably report regarding the integrity of their personal DM systems.