Freedom Processor for Nucleus CI24 The South of England Cochlear Implant Centre Experience Roberta Buhagiar, Sarie Cross and Julie Eyles1

1
Freedom Processor for Nucleus CI24 The South of
England Cochlear Implant Centre
ExperienceRoberta Buhagiar, Sarie Cross and
Julie Eyles1

Aided Thresholds Sound detection in quiet using
the standard map with both processors revealed a
difference between either processors with the
Freedom having giving better aided
thresholds. Average aided levels are shown below
(dBHL)

• APHAB
• Ergonomics Questionnaire

• Introduction
• At the South of England Cochlear Implant Centre
  (SOECIC) there are 189 CI24 users who could be
  upgraded to the new Freedom processor. The
  manufacturers believe that the cochlear implant
  user will benefit from the improved resistance to
  moisture damage, comfort and the trouble-shooting
  information from the LED. In addition the
  Freedom incorporates SMART sound features
• Beam - a forward facing directional microphone
  which enables the listener to focus on sound
  from one source.
• ADRO - adaptive dynamic range optimisation.
  The algorithm automatically places more emphasis
  on speech.
• Whisper - boosts the signal and makes it more
  audible.
• The purpose of the project was to evaluate the
  benefits of the upgrade to the Freedom from the
  perspective of the patient and the clinician.
• Method
• Twenty patients were approached and asked to try
  the Freedom speech processor. They were required
  to attend two appointments. During the first
  appointment, they underwent a hearing test and
  speech noise testing with the 3G, and then they
  were upgraded to the Freedom speech processor.
• Patients were given at least 4 weeks to get used
  to the new speech processor and then they
  underwent the same tests with Freedom.
• Aided Thresholds
• Adaptive Sentence Test (AST). The AST uses
  BKB sentence material presented at a level of
  65dB(A) from a speaker at 0 azimuth at a
  distance of 1 metre. BKB Male speaker noise at
  variable levels was introduced and the minimum
  level of noise where the listener was able to
  repeat two key elements of the sentences was
  recorded.
• Questionnaires the APHAB (Adapted Hearing
  Aid Benefit) and an ergonomics questionnaire
  which compared the wear-ability and ease of use
  of the two different processors were given to
  patients to fill in regarding the 3G and the
  Freedom speech processors.

Patient Comments The Patients were also asked to
comment about their experiences using the Freedom
processor. Some of the comments are shown
below
Music is clearer
Please make it easier to change settings
Not very straightforward to switch on to T setting
The digital display gives me confidence that it
is working
It looks more modern
The ADRO helps a lot
It sounds clearer
The BEAM is not as useful as I thought it would be
It has solved the moisture problems I used to
have
It has more settings to choose from
Speech in Noise Testing
Patients did not perform significantly
differently with the ESPrit 3G speech processor
or the Freedom speech processor. They were
tested using ADRO with the Freedom processor and
this did not yield different results either.
However, the majority of patients commented on
the fact that they found ADRO useful in everyday
life.
1 South of England Cochlear Implant Centre
Institute of Sound and Vibration Research,
University of Southampton