CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06051006eSRTUpdated Sep 12, 2025

The Value Electrical Stapedial Reflex Thresholds (eSRTs) Cochlear Implant Mapping

An observational study in Profound Hearing Loss and Cochlear Implants, sponsored by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris. Recruiting at 1 site in France. Open to participants aged 8 Years to 17 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-09-12.

Sponsored by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Jan 2026, 9 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started Dec 2023; still recruiting 2 years 10 months later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
30
Ages
8 Years to 17 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

One of the most significant challenges in cochlear implant programming, particularly for very young children and those with an associated pathologies, is the measurement of subjective comfort levels (= C-Subjective). Currently, to define this C-Subjective level, patients are presented with a loudness scale and must indicate whether the sound stimulus, sent via the implant, is soft, comfortable, or loud. The lower and upper stimulation levels must be determined for each electrode in order to program the implant. For many patients this can be difficult due to a lack of auditory experience and confusion between the sensation of sound intensity (weak or loud) and frequency (low or high).

A less commonly used but more objective approach to programming upper stimulation levels involves the use of the electrical stapedial reflex threshold (eSRTs) value. eSRTs are a promising measure, given the demonstrated correlation between the threshold that generates a stapedial reflex and the C-subjective level. Furthermore, eSRTs can be recorded in the majority of patients, and can typically be evoked at a comfortable stimulation level i.e. inferior to the uncomfortable level.

The main objective of this study is investigate the link between subjective comfort levels (C-subjective levels) and the eSRT.

Read the detailed description

One of the most significant challenges in cochlear implant programming, particularly for very young children and those with an associated pathologies, is the measurement of subjective comfort levels (= C-Subjective). Currently, to define this C-Subjective level, patients are presented with a loudness scale and must indicate whether the sound stimulus, sent via the implant, is soft, comfortable, or loud. The lower and upper stimulation levels must be determined for each electrode in order to program the implant. For many patients this can be difficult due to a lack of auditory experience and confusion between the sensation of sound intensity (weak or loud) and frequency (low or high).

For these patients, the adjustment is often based on the dynamic range recommended by the manufacturer in relation to the threshold (lower stimulation level) and/or on the discomfort level (upper stimulation level).

Objective measures such as ECAPs (Electric compound action potentials) are commonly used to estimate upper stimulation levels.

These measurements are useful for confirming electrode function and neuronal response, and some research has shown that these measures are correlated with the upper stimulation level. However, other studies suggest that ECAPs are poor predictors of high (and low) stimulation levels and can show variability between electrodes and between subjects.

A less commonly used but more objective approach to programming upper stimulation levels involves the use of the electrical stapedial reflex threshold (eSRTs) value. eSRTs are a promising measure, given the demonstrated correlation between the threshold that generates a stapedial reflex and the C-subjective level. Furthermore, eSRTs can be recorded in the majority of patients, and can typically be evoked at a comfortable stimulation level i.e. inferior to the uncomfortable level.

The patient settings are known as the MAP, where the upper and lower levels of stimulation are defined.

MAPs using eSRTs to set upper stimulation levels (C-eSRT) have been shown equal or better speech recognition results compared to behavior-based MAPs (intensity scale). Additionally, eSRT-based MAPs have been shown to result in equal sound intensity across all electrodes, and patients tend to prefer eSRT-based MAPs over behavioral MAPs.

The main objective of this study is investigate there is a link between subjective comfort levels (C-subjective levels) and the eSRT.

02

Conditions studied

  • Profound Hearing Loss
  • Cochlear Implants

Keywords

  • Profound hearing loss
  • Cochlear implants
  • Cochlear implant programming
  • Stapedial reflex
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris is the lead sponsor of 3,505 studies on the registry; 1,006 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
8 Years to 17 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Minor patients from 8 years with cochlear implants for at least 1 year and followed by a physician at Hôpital Necker-Enfants malades.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients between the ages of 8-17 years at the time of inclusion with cochlear implants for at least 1 year and followed at Hôpital Necker-Enfants malades
  • Use oral French as the main mode of communication
  • Have a tonal threshold with the cochlear implant of 40 dB or more
  • Have a normal tympanogram
  • Have a voice threshold of less than 70% at 30dB HL
  • Information and non-opposition of holders of parental authority and minor patients to participate in the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Present a severe neurological pathology before inclusion (which can be identified by an MRI +/- a neuro-pediatric assessment)
  • Present, on inclusion, a cognitive or psychiatric impairment or severe developmental delay
  • Be part of a family that does not understand oral French
  • Patients under AME (State Medical Aid)
05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
30 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Patients

    Minor patients from 8 years with cochlear implants for at least 1 year and followed at Hôpital Necker-Enfants malades.

    Other: ESR and ECAP measurements · Other: Device setting · Other: Speech audiometry · Other: Intelligibility in noise test · Other: Cochlear implant datalogging, speech audiometry test, FraSimat test

Interventions

  • OtherESR and ECAP measurements

    Measurement of electrically evoked stapedial reflexes (ESRT) by stimulation via the cochlear implant. Measurement of the Electric compound action potentials (ECAPs) on the electrodes where the ESRT were performed. The measurements and tests will be performed during a routine visit to the Necker hospital for the adjustment of the cochlear implant (visit 1).

  • OtherDevice setting

    The adjustment will be made by an audioprosthetist at the Center for Research in Audiology at Necker Hospital. The purpose of this setting is to modify the comfort thresholds using the ESR via a correction (according to the literature). The cochlear implant (CI) will therefore be set with the setting using the ESR (setting 2). The basic setting (setting 1) will be stored in memory in the CI. If ever the patient does not support setting 2, he/she will have the possibility of returning to the basic setting, without having to return to the Necker hospital for an additional setting. The measurements and tests will be done during an usual visit of the patient to the Necker hospital for the adjustment of the cochlear implant (visit 1).

  • OtherSpeech audiometry

    This examination is part of the usual care for a patient with a cochlear implant. Fournier's monosyllabic test will be used. The test will be carried out by an audioprosthetist at the Center for Research in Audiology at Necker Hospital. The measurement will be performed under both setting conditions: setting 1 (current setting) and setting 2 (based on ESR). The order of administration will be randomized in order to overcome a training effect. The measurements and tests will be done during an usual visit of the patient to the Necker hospital for the adjustment of the cochlear implant (visit 1).

  • OtherIntelligibility in noise test

    The FraSimat is a measure of speech perception in noise. The test consists of 14 sentences of 3 words, recorded in the presence of background noise, which the child must listen to and repeat. The background noise remains fixed at 65dB HL and the speech intensity adapts according to the patient's responses. The measurement will be performed under two setting conditions: MAP 1 (current setting) and MAP 2 (setting based on ESR). The order of administration will be randomized in order to overcome a training effect. The measurements and tests will be done during an usual visit of the patient to the Necker hospital for the adjustment of the cochlear implant (visit 1).

    Also known as: FraSimat

  • OtherCochlear implant datalogging, speech audiometry test, FraSimat test

    The follow-up visit (visit 2) will take place 1 month after visit 1 only for patients with a comfort levels threshold (via the eSRT) different from the current threshold (C-subjective). At the start of the visit, cochlear implant datalogging will be recorded to determine the use of both settings (setting 2, using the ESR and setting 1, basic setting) while wearing the cochlear implant. The datalogging will be recorded by an audioprosthetist at the Center for Research in Audiology at Necker Hospital. If the patient has worn the new program (setting 2), the speech audiometry test and the FraSimat test (Intelligibility in noise test) will be performed again with the setting based on ESR.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The relationship between the patient's current upper stimulation level (C-subjective) and the measured eSRT

    Correlation between the patient's current upper stimulation level (C-subjective) and the measured eSRT measured at the visit 1.

    Time frame: Day 0

Secondary outcomes

  1. To determine the relationship between the difference between C-subjective and the eSRT and the speech recognition scores

    Correlation between the difference between C-subjective and the eSRT measured at the visit 1 and the percent correct on the Fournier's monosyllabic word test.

    Time frame: Day 0

  2. To determine the relationship between the ECAPs (electric compound action potentials) and the eSRT

    Correlation between the patient's ECAPs (electric compound action potentials) and the measured eSRT measured at the visit 1.

    Time frame: Day 0

  3. To evaluate the difference in speech performance in silence obtained using a C-subjective MAP and a C-eSRT MAP

    Comparison of the percent correct on the Fournier's monosyllabic word test at the visit 1, using the C-subjective MAP and at the visit 2, using the C-eSRT MAP.

    Time frame: 1 month

  4. To evaluate the difference in speech performance in noise obtained using a C-subjective MAP and a C-eSRT MAP

    Comparison of the percent correct on the FraSimat speech in noise test at the visit 1, using the C-subjective MAP and at the visit 2, using the C-eSRT MAP.

    Time frame: 1 month

  5. The difference in average daily use time of C-subjective MAP and a C-eSRT MAP

    Comparison of the number of average daily hours of use time for the C-subjective MAP and the C-eSRT MAP at the visit 2.

    Time frame: 1 month

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Hôpital Necker-Enfants Malades
    Paris, 75015, France
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Allum JH, Greisiger R, Probst R. Relationship of intraoperative electrically evoked stapedius reflex thresholds to maximum comfortable loudness levels of children with cochlear implants. Int J Audiol. 2002 Mar;41(2):93-9. doi: 10.3109/14992020209090399. PubMed 12212861 ↗
  • Walkowiak A, Lorens A, Polak M, Kostek B, Skarzynski H, Szkielkowska A, Skarzynski PH. Evoked stapedius reflex and compound action potential thresholds versus most comfortable loudness level: assessment of their relation for charge-based fitting strategies in implant users. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2011;73(4):189-95. doi: 10.1159/000326892. Epub 2011 Jun 10. PubMed 21659787 ↗
  • Geers A, Brenner C, Davidson L. Factors associated with development of speech perception skills in children implanted by age five. Ear Hear. 2003 Feb;24(1 Suppl):24S-35S. doi: 10.1097/01.AUD.0000051687.99218.0F. PubMed 12612478 ↗
  • Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Gantz B. Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am. 1990 Sep;88(3):1385-91. doi: 10.1121/1.399716. PubMed 2229673 ↗
  • Brown CJ, Hughes ML, Luk B, Abbas PJ, Wolaver A, Gervais J. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the nucleus 24 speech processor: data from adults. Ear Hear. 2000 Apr;21(2):151-63. doi: 10.1097/00003446-200004000-00009. PubMed 10777022 ↗
  • Gordon KA, Papsin BC, Harrison RV. Toward a battery of behavioral and objective measures to achieve optimal cochlear implant stimulation levels in children. Ear Hear. 2004 Oct;25(5):447-63. doi: 10.1097/01.aud.0000146178.84065.b3. PubMed 15599192 ↗
  • Hodges AV, Butts S, Dolan-Ash S, Balkany TJ. Using electrically evoked auditory reflex thresholds to fit the CLARION cochlear implant. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl. 1999 Apr;177:64-8. doi: 10.1177/00034894991080s413. PubMed 10214804 ↗
  • Hodges AV, Balkany TJ, Ruth RA, Lambert PR, Dolan-Ash S, Schloffman JJ. Electrical middle ear muscle reflex: use in cochlear implant programming. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Sep;117(3 Pt 1):255-61. doi: 10.1016/s0194-5998(97)70183-9. PubMed 9334774 ↗
  • Lorens A, Walkowiak A, Piotrowska A, Skarzynski H, Anderson I. ESRT and MCL correlations in experienced paediatric cochlear implant users. Cochlear Implants Int. 2004 Mar;5(1):28-37. doi: 10.1002/cii.121. PubMed 18792192 ↗
  • Van Den Abbeele T, Noel-Petroff N, Akin I, Caner G, Olgun L, Guiraud J, Truy E, Attias J, Raveh E, Belgin E, Sennaroglu G, Basta D, Ernst A, Martini A, Rosignoli M, Levi H, Elidan J, Benghalem A, Amstutz-Montadert I, Lerosey Y, De Vel E, Dhooge I, Hildesheimer M, Kronenberg J, Arnold L. Multicentre investigation on electrically evoked compound action potential and stapedius reflex: how do these objective measures relate to implant programming parameters? Cochlear Implants Int. 2012 Feb;13(1):26-34. doi: 10.1179/1754762810Y.0000000001. PubMed 22340749 ↗
  • Brickley G, Boyd P, Wyllie F, O'Driscoll M, Webster D, Nopp P. Investigations into electrically evoked stapedius reflex measures and subjective loudness percepts in the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant. Cochlear Implants Int. 2005 Mar;6(1):31-42. doi: 10.1002/cii.18. PubMed 18792318 ↗
  • Craddock L, Cooper H, van de Heyning P, Vermeire K, Davies M, Patel J, Cullington H, Ricaud R, Brunelli T, Knight M, Plant K, Dees DC, Murray B. Comparison between NRT-based MAPs and behaviourally measured MAPs at different stimulation rates--a multicentre investigation. Cochlear Implants Int. 2003 Dec;4(4):161-70. doi: 10.1179/cim.2003.4.4.161. PubMed 18792149 ↗
  • Franck KH, Norton SJ. Estimation of psychophysical levels using the electrically evoked compound action potential measured with the neural response telemetry capabilities of Cochlear Corporation's CI24M device. Ear Hear. 2001 Aug;22(4):289-99. doi: 10.1097/00003446-200108000-00004. PubMed 11527036 ↗
  • Jeon EK, Brown CJ, Etler CP, O'Brien S, Chiou LK, Abbas PJ. Comparison of electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds and loudness estimates for the stimuli used to program the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant. J Am Acad Audiol. 2010 Jan;21(1):16-27. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.21.1.3. PubMed 20085196 ↗
  • Joly CA, Pean V, Hermann R, Seldran F, Thai-Van H, Truy E. Using Electrically-evoked Compound Action Potentials to Estimate Perceptive Levels in Experienced Adult Cochlear Implant Users. Otol Neurotol. 2017 Oct;38(9):1278-1289. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001548. PubMed 28834942 ↗
  • Smoorenburg GF, Willeboer C, van Dijk JE. Speech perception in nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processor settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds. Audiol Neurootol. 2002 Nov-Dec;7(6):335-47. doi: 10.1159/000066154. PubMed 12401965 ↗
  • Wolfe J, Kasulis H. Relationships among objective measures and speech perception in adult users of the HiResolution Bionic Ear. Cochlear Implants Int. 2008 Jun;9(2):70-81. doi: 10.1179/cim.2008.9.2.70. PubMed 18680210 ↗
  • Bresnihan M, Norman G, Scott F, Viani L. Measurement of comfort levels by means of electrical stapedial reflex in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001 Aug;127(8):963-6. doi: 10.1001/archotol.127.8.963. PubMed 11493206 ↗
  • Polak M, Hodges AV, King JE, Payne SL, Balkany TJ. Objective methods in postlingually and prelingually deafened adults for programming cochlear implants: ESR and NRT. Cochlear Implants Int. 2006 Sep;7(3):125-41. doi: 10.1179/cim.2006.7.3.125. PubMed 18792380 ↗
  • Holder JT, Holcomb MA, Snapp H, Labadie RF, Vroegop J, Rocca C, Elgandy MS, Dunn C, Gifford RH. Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults Using Bimodal Hearing Configurations. Otol Neurotol Open. 2022 Jun;2(2):e011. doi: 10.1097/ONO.0000000000000011. Epub 2022 Jun 24. PubMed 36274668 ↗
  • Palani S, Alexander A, Sreenivasan A. Evaluation of the Electrically-Evoked Stapedial Reflex Threshold in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users with High-Frequency Probe Tones. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022 Feb 8;26(4):e566-e573. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1742332. eCollection 2022 Oct. PubMed 36405469 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 12, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06051006
Lead sponsor
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
Collaborators
URC-CIC Paris Descartes Necker Cochin
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 22, 2023
Start date
Dec 7, 2023
Primary completion
Jan 7, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 7, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 12, 2025

Study contacts

Nara Vaez-Leppin
Contact
nara.vaez-leppin@aphp.fr
0187892914 ext. +33
Hélène Morel
Contact
helene.morel@aphp.fr
0171196346 ext. +33
Melissa MacAskill
study director · Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
Nara Vaez-Leppin
principal investigator · Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion