Outcomes Using the Optimized Pitch and Language Strategy Versus the Advanced Combination Encoder Strategy in Mandarin-Speaking Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Thirteen of the 31 participants did not use OPAL more than ACE during the take-home period, so the total-group results mix people with very different OPAL experience. The acclimatization period varied, with a mean duration of 7.1 weeks, and some participants had delays unrelated to the study. Only a female talker was used for the lexical tone tests, so results may not apply to all Mandarin talkers. OPAL is described as an experimental strategy in this paper. The sentence-in-noise result was null for the whole group, and noninferiority to ACE was not shown overall. The subjective speech quality improvement was 0.51 units, below the 1-unit level the authors cite as clinically relevant. Some session 1 lexical tone data were missing because of procedural problems. The study did not follow participants long enough to assess complete OPAL performance.

The supplied text lists author contributions and ethics approval but does not report external funding or conflicts of interest.

Do not conclude that OPAL is better than ACE for all listening situations. Sentence-in-noise thresholds did not improve, and OPAL was not shown to be at least as good as ACE overall. The clearer benefits were seen in participants who used OPAL more than ACE during take-home acclimatization.