Bionic ear programming system

• US 7,107,101 B1
• Filed: 08/13/2002
• Issued: 09/12/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 08/17/2001
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Advanced Bionics AG (Sonova Holding AG)
• Original Assignee: Advanced Bionics Corporation (Sonova Holding AG)
• Inventors: Faltys, Michael A.
• Primary Examiner(s): Manuel, George
• Assistant Examiner(s): Kramer, Nicole R.
• Application Number:
  US10/218,616
• Time in Patent Office: 1,491 Days
• Field of Search: 607 55- 57
• US Class Current: 607/55
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 1/36038 Cochlear stimulation

Abstract

A method of programming a bionic ear cochlear implant provides access to the full functionality of the implant, while still providing a simple-to-administer, more reliable, and faster fitting experience for the patient and clinician. The method includes (a) conducting a pre-evaluation stage focused on sorting and identifying bad electrode contacts, reducing fitting time and improving patient performance; (b) conducting a programming stage wherein T and M levels are adjusted based on information derived during the pre-evaluation stage; and (c) conducting a post-evaluation stage wherein wired speech understanding tests are automatically run in order to provide an objective programming choice. The pre-evaluation stage automatically runs a set of objective tests, and then, based on the result of such tests, generates a template for the clinician to use during the programming stage. The objective tests, inter alia, identify and remove bad electrode contacts from the template. The post-evaluation stage quickly runs some unattended wired speech understanding tests that allow objective rather than subjective programming choices to be made.

Claims

1. A method of programming a bionic ear implant comprising;

conducting a pre-evaluation stage focused on sorting and identifying bad electrode contacts, reducing fitting time and improving patient performance;

conducting a programming stage wherein T and M levels are adjusted based on information derived during the pre-evaluation stage;

conducting a post-evaluation stage wherein wired speech understanding tests are automatically run in order to provide an objective programming choice; and

launching each of the three stages, the pre-evaluation stage, the programming stage, and the post-evaluation stage, from a single programming window;

wherein said pre-evaluation stage includes generating a template for use during the programming stage that includes estimated T and M levels; and

wherein generating said template further includes removing from the template bad electrode contacts.

2. The method of claim 1 further including conducting the pre-evaluation stage unattended.

3. The method of claim 2 wherein conducting the pre-evaluation stage comprises:

performing an initial setup;

setting safety levels that observe compliance voltage;

running an Electric Field Imaging (EFI) test to access electrode quality and to eliminate problem electrodes within an electrode array of the bionic ear implant;

running a Neural Response Imaging (NRI) test to check loudness growth on each electrode used within the electrode array; and

running an Automatic Electrode Interaction (AIT) test to estimate interaction between electrodes of the electrode array and to assign electrodes into least-interacting groups.

4. The method of claim 3 wherein running the EFI test further includes notifying a clinician if a large percentage of the electrodes within the electrode array are failing the EFI test.

5. The method of claim 3 wherein running the EFI test further comprises running the EFI test over and over again until the electrode array measurements stabilize.

6. The method of claim 3 wherein the step of running an NRI test to test for loudness growth further includes eliminating electrodes without loudness growth.

7. The method of claim 6 further including estimating relative T and M levels using the loudness growth test results.

8. The method of claim 3 further including using the AIT test to provide a minimum estimated performance score, which minimum estimated performance score provides an objective fitting goal.

9. The method of claim 1 wherein conducting the programming stage includes setting and adjusting T and M levels using the template generated during the pre-evaluation stage.

10. The method of claim 1 wherein conducting the post-evaluation stage comprises invoking automated speech testing material adapted to allow unattended wired speech understanding tests to be quickly performed in order to provide objective measures that facilitate quantitative assessment of performance increases of the bionic ear implant.

11. The method of claim 10 further including generating information transfer indexes that allow automatic adjustments to be made to the program of the bionic ear implant.

12. A bionic ear implant programming system comprising:

means for conducting a pre-evaluation stage focused on sorting and identifying bad electrode contacts, reducing fitting time and improving patient performance;

means for conducting a programming stage wherein T and M levels are adjusted based on information derived during the pre-evaluation stage;

means for conducting a post-evaluation stage wherein wired speech understanding tests are automatically run in order to provide an objective programming choice; and

means for launching each of the three stages, the pre-evaluation stage, the programming stage, and the post-evaluation stage, from a single programming window.

13. The system of claim 12 wherein the means for conducting the pre-evaluation stage further includes means for estimating T and M levels and means for generating a template for use during the programming stage that uses the estimated T and M levels.

14. The system of claim 13 wherein the means for conducting the pre-evaluation stage includes means for removing from the template bad electrode contacts.