# A novel cochlear implant assessment tool: Audiometric and speech recognition analysis

## TL;DR

This paper introduces CLABOX, a new tool for evaluating cochlear implant users, showing it is effective for audiometric and speech recognition tests compared to traditional sound booths.

## Contribution

CLABOX provides a viable alternative to sound booths for cochlear implant assessments, especially in facilities without soundproof environments.

## Key findings

- CLABOX showed better speech recognition in noise and pure tone audiometry results compared to sound booths.
- The fixed noise test results were significantly higher in CLABOX than in sound booths.
- The four-tone average thresholds were higher in CLABOX, indicating potential differences in test environments.

## Abstract

•Facilitate the cochlear implant programming for both patients and professionals.•New possibility of evaluation in tests of pure tone and speech recognition.•Possibility of expanding the use of new evaluation methodologies.•Improve the viability of clinical care.•Expand this care model in centers that do not have a sound booth.

Facilitate the cochlear implant programming for both patients and professionals.

New possibility of evaluation in tests of pure tone and speech recognition.

Possibility of expanding the use of new evaluation methodologies.

Improve the viability of clinical care.

Expand this care model in centers that do not have a sound booth.

To compare the results of Pure Tone Audiometry (PTA) and speech recognition, of users of Cochlear Implant (CI) between CLABOX with Direct Audio Input (DAI) and the Sound Booth (SB).

Fifty individuals with CIs, 33 adults and 17 children, were included. Speech recognition tests in noise fixed and adaptive were applied with the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT), Ling test, and PTA, in the SB (in free field) and in CLABOX.

For speech recognition in noise, averages were better in the CLABOX; for PTA, they were higher in the CLABOX; and for Ling test, there was no significant change in the categories between SB and CLABOX. The fixed noise were higher in the CLABOX (88.3%) than in the SB (78.9%), p-value < 0.001. In the HINT with adaptive noise, the results were significant (p-value = 0.007); the S/N ratio was 2.14 dB in the CLABOX and 3.42 dB in the SB. For the four-tone average, the average thresholds for the CLABOX and the SB were 29.8 dB and 23 dB, respectively (p-values < 0.001).

CLABOX was an effective tool to evaluate the PTA and speech recognition tests when compared to the conventional evaluation with a SB in the CI user population.