Has CI technology improved as fast as HAs?

Which technology has improved more, CI or HA in the last 10 years

  • CI has improved much more!

    Votes: 5 55.6%

  • CI

    Votes: 1 11.1%

  • Same

    Votes: 1 11.1%

  • HA

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • HA has improved much more!

    Votes: 2 22.2%
  • Total voters
    9
D

deafdude1

New Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2009
Messages
1,268
Reaction score
0
Inquiring minds would like to know. I talked to someone who got 22 electrode CI back in the year 2000. I don't know when 22 electrodes was first invented but im guessing it's been over a decade. Why isn't there 128 electrodes today? It was even mentioned in a 2006 article but has yet to even be used in clinical trials. I did read about fiber optics/laser CI but im afraid by the time that's in clinical trials, a cure will begin clinical trials a couple years later. :hmm:

Ive been wondering which technology to this day has progressed further, HA or CI? I am not talking about what will possibly be out in the future but today. Let's take 10 years ago as a time frame and take a look at HAs and CIs available 10 years ago. Now let's take today, which do you feel has improved more in the last 10 years, HAs or CIs?

I say CIs and HAs have improved at the same rate, the only thing that has changed was that candidacy criteria has become way too lax. That's to discuss in another thread. I remember back in 1998 my old HAs had a peak gain of about 70db and 10 years later, it has improved to 80db peak gain. What improvements did CI undergo in the last 10 years besides a slightly better external processor?
 
CI processors have improved greatly since the early 80s. Back then, a person could only hear environmental sounds in a robotic sense. Nowadays, CI recipients are able to use the phone and understand speech. They also report their CI hearing sounding just like it did before they lost their hearing.

I think CI technology has far surpassed hearing aids although the latter have come a long way as well. Instead of having bulky body worn aids or single channel analog hearing aids, we now have digitals and analogs that have multiple channels, compression, feedback control and music programs.

Having said that, I received a pair of top of the line digital aids (Oticon DigiFocus II super power BTEs) in 1995 yet they did not help me understand speech. I faired much better with my 1991 analog Oticon 380Ps.
 
There aren't more electrodes because there is no proof that more electrodes makes for better hearing (beyond the difference between 1 and 12, I think). 22 is not better than 16. That is why Cochlear had a 24 and is back to a 22. The real difference has been in the speech processing, in the external units.
 
Also, I like the design of the current CIs better than the old CIs...

Our kids are coming with cool designs on their CIs. :lol:
 
Research has proven time and time again that no more than 3 electrodes are needed to understand speech. I'm proof of that. I only have 10 electrodes activated on my CIs yet I understand speech much better than I did when I had all of them turned on.
 
Asking why a CI doesn't have more electrodes is kinda like asking why doesn't a mouse have more buttons.......
 
Wait a minute. I just re-read the poll and noticed that there are two options for CI: "CI has improved much more!" and "CI." Why are there 2 options for CI?
 
Hear Again said:
Wait a minute. I just re-read the poll and noticed that there are two options for CI: "CI has improved much more!" and "CI." Why are there 2 options for CI?
Click to expand...

There is also the same for HA. "HA has improved much more!" and "HA". I guess he wants to see if we just think it's improved a little more or a lot more (from both sides).
 
Daredevel7 said:
There is also the same for HA. "HA has improved much more!" and "HA". I guess he wants to see if we just think it's improved a little more or a lot more (from both sides).
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I thought after I posted my question.
 
So far I am the only one to vote HA improved much more! :P

Plus I am reassured that if I go through a second childhood and start sliding on a playground, my hearing aids will keep right on working. :lol:

Of course, they could be broken if I got hit by a soccer ball as once happened in my youth. :hmm:
 
Bottesini said:
So far I am the only one to vote HA improved much more! :P

Plus I am reassured that if I go through a second childhood and start sliding on a playground, my hearing aids will keep right on working. :lol:

Of course, they could be broken if I got hit by a soccer ball as once happened in my youth. :hmm:
Click to expand...

My daughter goes on slides everyday and her CI is just fine.:roll:

Also, that has nothing to do with which has improved more.
 
Bottesini said:
Plus I am reassured that if I go through a second childhood and start sliding on a playground, my hearing aids will keep right on working. :lol:
Click to expand...

It isn't a problem to have an erased map put back on a processor. All the audi does is connect it to the computer and voila!

One way to solve this problem is to turn your CI off. You may not be able to hear, but who needs to hear when they go down a slide? :giggle:
 
faire_jour said:
My daughter goes on slides everyday and her CI is just fine.:roll:

Also, that has nothing to do with which has improved more.
Click to expand...

Sorry. One person here not only was replaced the CI from sliding.

And that was Kaelei.

It means I think technology is better. It would be improved more for CI if static was no longer a problem.
 
Hear Again said:
It isn't a problem to have an erased map put back on a processor. All the audi does is connect it to the computer and voila!

One way to solve this problem is to turn your CI off. You may not be able to hear, but who needs to hear when they go down a slide? :giggle:
Click to expand...

That is true. :lol: But my arthritic knees will probably keep me off the slide anyway!
 
Bottesini said:
Sorry. One person here not only was replaced the CI from sliding.

And that was Kaelei.

It means I think technology is better. It would be improved more for CI if static was no longer a problem.
Click to expand...

It is no longer a big problem. Both the Freedom and the Harmony are MUCH more resistant to static. I was told the biggest problems are from older devices and body worns. Also, it takes a static charge touching the headpiece itself to cause an erasure. They are also water resistant and the magnets can be removed for MRI's! Big improvements!
 
faire_jour said:
It is no longer a problem. Both the Freedom and the Harmony are MUCH more resistant to static. I was told the biggest problems are from older devices and body worns. Also, it takes a static charge touching the headpiece itself to cause an erasure. They are also water resistant!
Click to expand...

That is good news. I didn't know that.
 
faire_jour said:
It is no longer a big problem. Both the Freedom and the Harmony are MUCH more resistant to static. I was told the biggest problems are from older devices and body worns. Also, it takes a static charge touching the headpiece itself to cause an erasure. They are also water resistant and the magnets can be removed for MRI's! Big improvements!
Click to expand...

only the Nucleus 24 and Med-El have been approved for use with MRIs. The Nucleus is approved for use with a more powerful MRI (1.5 Tesla), but requires that a small surgical procedure is done to remove the magnet in the implant and then to replace it after the MRI is taken. The Med-El is approved for use with a less powerful MRI (0.2 Tesla), but does not require a surgical procedure or removal of any magnet. Some people argue that low-powered MRIs are too uncommon, so this isn't a feasible option, but they are common enough--making up at least 20% of MRIs sold in 1994 alone, according to one study. The Clarion has not yet been approved for use with MRIs, although the physical properties of the Clarion CII Bionic Ear and interaction with an MRI are very similar to that of the Med-El while those of the Clarion HiRes 90k Implant are similar to that of the Nucleus, so is not unreasonable to anticipate that someday in the future the Clarion may also be approved for MRI use.

Cochlear Implant Central - Speech Strategies
 
jillio said:
only the Nucleus 24 and Med-El have been approved for use with MRIs. The Nucleus is approved for use with a more powerful MRI (1.5 Tesla), but requires that a small surgical procedure is done to remove the magnet in the implant and then to replace it after the MRI is taken. The Med-El is approved for use with a less powerful MRI (0.2 Tesla), but does not require a surgical procedure or removal of any magnet. Some people argue that low-powered MRIs are too uncommon, so this isn't a feasible option, but they are common enough--making up at least 20% of MRIs sold in 1994 alone, according to one study. The Clarion has not yet been approved for use with MRIs, although the physical properties of the Clarion CII Bionic Ear and interaction with an MRI are very similar to that of the Med-El while those of the Clarion HiRes 90k Implant are similar to that of the Nucleus, so is not unreasonable to anticipate that someday in the future the Clarion may also be approved for MRI use.

Cochlear Implant Central - Speech Strategies
Click to expand...

The Clarion is not the current AB device. The 90k is.

BionicEar.com - Harmony Cochlear Implant by Advanced Bionics

Is the cochlear implant safe with MRI?
Only after the magnet has been removed. As referrals for MRI are increasing, it is comforting to know that your implant is safe with this imaging technique. But you must be sure to have the magnet removed first.


The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared the HiResolution® Bionic Ear System's HiRes 90K® implant for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) at 0.3 Tesla and 1.5 Tesla with the internal magnet removed.


Your information is clearly outdated.
 
Back
Top