Effect of latency offset matching on sound localization in bimodal CI recipients using gaze tracking

Effect of latency offset matching on sound localization in bimodal CI recipients using gaze tracking - BimCI-Loc-LatMat

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

DRKS

Registry ID

DRKS00032722

Enrollment

Registered

2024-01-19

Start date

2026-06-29

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

H83

Interventions

Group 1: Bimodal patients fitted with a cochlear implant (CI) and hearing aid will perform sound localization tests and hearing tests during a two-day study appointment.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: The study participants must meet the following inclusion criteria: - Age: = 18 years - Ability to visually fixate a calibration marker with a diameter of 6 cm at a distance of 1.5 m during a calibration procedure without visual aids or by means of contact lenses used in everyday life. For bimodal CI patients, the following additional inclusion criteria apply: - Hearing aid side: hearing aid of any type, hearing experience with hearing aid: = 6 months - CI side: unaidable hearing threshold in air conduction at all frequencies: = 70 dB HL, Implant: C40, C40+, PULSAR, SONATA, CONCERTO, SYNCHRONY or SYNCHRONY 2, SP sound coding strategy used in everyday life: FS4, FS4-p or FSP, Hearing experience with CI: = 6 months. For the normal hearing study subjects, the following additional inclusion criteria apply: - Both ears: Hearing threshold = 20 dB HL at all frequencies.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: All study participants: - cognitive impairment

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Effect of latency offset matching on RMS error in sound localization when using OLSA sentences as stimuli. The stimuli are presented by thirteen loudspeakers in the front semicircle of a loudspeaker circuit and the response is captured by the gaze using head and eye tracking systems.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Bimodal CI patients: - Effect of latency offset matching on RMS error when OLnoise segments are used as stimuli - Effect of stimulus type (OLSA sentences, OLnoise segments) on RMS error without using latency offset matching - Effect of stimulus type on RMS error with use of latency offset matching - Effect of latency offset matching on signed bias for OLSA sentences. - Effect of latency offset matching on signed bias for OLnoise segments - Effect of stimulus type on signed bias without latency offset matching - Effect of stimulus type on signed bias with latency offset matching - Effect of latency offset matching on mean response time for OLSA sentences. - Effect of latency offset matching on mean response time for OLnoise segments - Effect of stimulus type on mean reaction time without latency offset matching - Effect of stimulus type on mean reaction time with latency offset matching Normal hearing subjects: - Effect of stimulus type (OLSA sentences, OLnoise segments) on RMS error - Effect of stimulus type on signed bias - Effect of stimulus type on mean reaction time The stimuli are presented by thirteen loudspeakers in the front semicircle of a loudspeaker circuit and the response is captured by the gaze using head and eye tracking systems.	—

Measure

Time frame

Bimodal CI patients: - Effect of latency offset matching on RMS error when OLnoise segments are used as stimuli - Effect of stimulus type (OLSA sentences, OLnoise segments) on RMS error without using latency offset matching - Effect of stimulus type on RMS error with use of latency offset matching - Effect of latency offset matching on signed bias for OLSA sentences. - Effect of latency offset matching on signed bias for OLnoise segments - Effect of stimulus type on signed bias without latency offset matching - Effect of stimulus type on signed bias with latency offset matching - Effect of latency offset matching on mean response time for OLSA sentences. - Effect of latency offset matching on mean response time for OLnoise segments - Effect of stimulus type on mean reaction time without latency offset matching - Effect of stimulus type on mean reaction time with latency offset matching Normal hearing subjects: - Effect of stimulus type (OLSA sentences, OLnoise segments) on RMS error - Effect of stimulus type on signed bias - Effect of stimulus type on mean reaction time The stimuli are presented by thirteen loudspeakers in the front semicircle of a loudspeaker circuit and the response is captured by the gaze using head and eye tracking systems.

—

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactThomas Wesarg

Universitätsklinikum Freiburg Klinik für Hals-, Nasen- und OhrenheilkundeSektion Cochlear Implant

thomas.wesarg@uniklinik-freiburg.de0049 761/270-72749

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jun 27, 2026