AAC Info and White Papers
www.aac-rerc.com

The Head Contact Microphone (HCM) was developed for the Navy SEALs in 1989. The project came to Coastal Systems Station (CSS) of the Naval Surface Warfare Center engineer Frank Downs as a request from the SEALs to construct a miniature waterproof microphone to use in their full-face masks to overcome wind noise on their high-speed boats. Mr. Downs developed a flat, head contact microphone that lead to a patent for "Surface Laminated piezoelectric film transducer [patent no 5,889,871]." Funding for the project was through an Internal Research/Engineering Development grant.

In 1994, three Pittsburgh firemen lost their lives in what should have been a routine fire. Disturbed by this tragic event, representatives from the Pittsburgh Fire Department (PFD) and the NASA Mid-Atlantic Technology Applications Center (MTAC) met to search for technologies that would be applicable to the fire fighting community in order to prevent such tragic incidents from reoccurring. MTAC issued a formal request to the Federal Labs searching for potential technologies to solve specific fire fighting needs. In 1996, MTAC and the Mid Atlantic Region of the Federal Laboratory Consortium held a workshop at NASA Langley on Fire Fighting technology needs. Ed Linsenmeyer (CSS ORTA) presented overviews of CSS technologies, including the Head Contact Microphone (HCM).

In 1997, the existing capabilities of the HCM were demonstrated to the PFD. Subsequently, a "bench prototype" that was adapted to a fire helmet was developed and demonstrated. Based on that demonstration, the PFD struck a "hand shake deal with CSS" and a Bench Prototype II was constructed specifically for fire helmets. In 1998, at the Pittsburgh Fire Department Training Center, industry companies were invited to a public demonstration during a live fire test. MTAC referred Radio Ear to CSS for potential licensing and commercialization of HCM to the fire fighting community. A nonexclusive license was issued to Sensory Devices doing business as Radio Ear, for the Head Contact Microphone in April of 1999.

The Head Contact Microphone has undergone preliminary clinical testing at Duke University Medical Center and Boston Children's Hospital with patients who exhibit dysarthria (flaccid and spastic) and vocal cord paralysis. Preliminary findings reveal that the Head Contact Microphone provides high quality output, is non-obtrusive, lightweight, and can be placed on multiple sites (cricothyroid, occipital bone, temporal bone, mastoid, forehead, mandible) with comparable quality output. It requires minimal setup and training. All patient reports have been favorable.

Potential clinical applications of the Head Contact Microphone include AAC for amplification of low volume, microphone input for auditory trainers with autistic children who are nonspeaking.

Presently, the Luminaud Company produces a Transdermal Mic, which functions as throat microphone. This product is relatively inexpensive ($50.00) and is used exclusively as an amplification system. This hands free microphone eliminates the need to hold a microphone or to have one extended in front of the user's face. Typically throat based microphones pick up unwanted laryngeal noises.

The Head Contact Microphone can be placed in different head locations, and as such ambient sounds are seemingly reduced. It also could be placed within a headband, hat or built into the headrest of a wheelchair with modification.

During the past six months, we have collected the data from 26 AAC intervention specialists for a variety of different projects. These individuals were located across the United State and Canada. In each case, our goal was to collect expert opinions from these individuals. It was important to maintain their identity so that we could contact them for "follow-up" discussions and clarifications. Rather than mail the questionnaires to them, we used the Internet. The e-mail addresses of each of the participants was placed in an address list. In each case a letter inviting them to participate was sent along with a standard questionnaire. In the letter, the purpose of the project was described, they were informed that they would not be anonymous, and were reminded that by completing and returning the questionnaire that they agreed to participate in this project (IRB requirement). They were instructed to complete the questionnaire and return it to the AAC-RERC stuff using the "reply" function of their e-mail application.

For this project, the response rate was high and responses were prompt, as 92% of the respondents completed the questionnaire following the first request. Following the second request, a total of 98% of the participants responded. Data collection was completed within calendar 10 days. A summary of results was electronically sent to each of the respondents.

For two different projects, we have had AAC intervention experts and AAC users respond to a questionnaire by accessing a specialized World Wide Web Site. The site was used to maintain the anonymity of the individual respondents. It also allowed for an asynchronous response strategy for individuals who required an extensive time to complete the questionnaire.

During one project, we demonstrated a prototype version of an AAC interface to current AAC users and to AAC intervention specialists. (The remote computer control strategy (VNC) is described in Virtual Research Strategy III). In brief, respondents were contacted by telephone and using the Virtual Network Computing application (VNC) the interface was demonstrated on a computer in our lab at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, while being simultaneously displayed on the computer of the respondent. During the demonstration, the interface was manipulated by research staff at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and the various features and functions were described via the telephone. At selected times, the interface was manipulated by the respondent using his or her own computer system.

Following the demonstration, the respondents were asked to complete a questionnaire indicating the extent to which they felt the proposed interface had a series of design specifications. Respondents were given the address of a specialized WWW site, provided with brief instructions to access a descriptive letter and the questionnaire. The letter described the project, presented the Institutional Review Board guidelines for the project, informed individuals that their responses would be confidential, indicated that by completing the questionnaire and "submitting it" they would have agreed to participate in the project. The respondents were given one week following the VNC demonstration to complete the questionnaire. Since the research team was unaware of the identity of the individuals who completed the questionnaire, reminders were sent to all participants encouraging those who had not responded to finish the questionnaire within a given deadline. In time, all did so.
For a second project, persons with ALS who used augmentative and alternative communication systems and their spouses or primary caregivers were asked to provide the research team with the messages (single words and phrases) that they used frequently. They were asked to provide this information in response to categories of messages such as (1) messages to request assistance. (2) messages to discuss our feelings about your disease, and so on. Each participant was contacted personally and the IRB guidelines for the project were presented to them. After they had provided consent, they were given a copy of the questionnaire in paper form. The addresses for the specialized web site was stored under the "bookmarks or favorite" section of their net browser. Therefore, when they had the time, they could contact the web site and download the questionnaire unto their personal computer. After completing each section of the questionnaire, that section could be submitted to the laboratory at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. This process was completed until each of the sections of the questionnaire had been submitted.
This strategy:

In our virtual research consortium, we have made extensive use of "remote computer control: strategies. We have utilized the Virtual Network Computing Application (VNC), additional information is available at :
http://www.onlineitdegree.net/guide-to-virtual-network-computing/

In general, VNC allows remote computer control across computer platforms (Macintosh, Windows, UNIX, NT). One computer acts as a server, such that complete access to the server computer can be provided over the internet to "viewer" computers. Computer control allows individuals on the viewer computer to control applications, access desktop and hard disk files, and even control system software. Of course, access is secured through the use of passwords and the IP number of the "server" computer.

During a session, one computer acts as the "server" computer while one or more computers can act as "viewer" computers. In our work, we have utilized four "viewer" computers in some sessions. The "rate of response" is dependent on the number of viewer computers and the speed of the internet connection.

When using VNC, the operator of the "server" computer can control that computer and operators of "viewer" computers can also control the "server" computer. Control is transferred by clicking the mouse or striking a key on the board of either computer. In the AAC-RERC, we have used VNC for a number of different applications. They are briefly summarized below.

During the development of the AAC Menu Interface, AAC experts throughout North America were consulted. Prototypes of the software were demonstrated to the remote experts using VNC. The VNC application was downloaded into the development computer. VNC was also downloaded into the computers of the AAC experts. With the development computer as the "server" computer, the AAC experts (viewer computers) could view a demonstration of the software under development and could operate the software remotely. Usually, verbal interaction occurred using a conventional telephone.

Using VNC, AAC experts could be actively involved in every step of prototype development without having it loaded onto their computers. This was particularly useful for AAC users, as they did not have to risk having a "new" software product installed in their computers' thereby risking contamination of their system.

When the AAC Menu Interface was evaluated by nearly 30 AAC users and AAC intervention experts from across North American, VNC was used to demonstrate the prototype of the software. All of the participants in that development project viewed and controlled the software using VNC.

Staff at the AAC-RERC have used VNC to provide IS support for consultants, field test personnel, and AAC users at remote sites. Using VNC, computer programmers at the RERC have been able to troubleshoot computer programs at remote sites.

In addition, RERC staff use VNC to remotely control remote computers and download software applications off the internet. For example, when software prototypes research the alpha and beta testing stage of development, RERC staff can control a consultation's computer remotely to install the application and make sure that it is working correctly.

VNC is useful in training someone at a remote site to operate software. For example, some of our consultants were unfamiliar with net conferencing software. So, RERC staff downloaded the software for them and then taught them how to use it. A conventional telephone was used for communication with the remote site during the process.

A virtual research consortium involves researchers at a number of locations. VNC has been used regularly to support our research discussions. For example, prior to a presentation, staff from one of the sites prepared a PowerPoint presentation that contained data collected at a number of sites. Prior to the actual presentation, the multimedia presentation was loaded onto a "server" computer and researchers at remote sites signed on as "viewers." Using the convention telephone for verbal interaction, the slide show was presented, discussed, and changes were made.

Point-to-point communication refers to the communication between two computers (similar to a conventional phone conversation). Of course it is possible to include a number of individuals on each end of the conversation, such as when speakerphones are used; however, only two computers are involved in point-to-point communication. Multi-point communication refers to communication among more than two computers (similar to a conference call involving a number of different telephones). An application must specifically support mulit-point conferencing to include more that two sites, although with technologies known as "reflectors" or "multi-point control units (MCU)" it is possible to hold multi-point conferences with point to point technologies.

Point to point technologies The MCU (an expensive peice of hardware and software) is used to replicate and distribute point to point protocols across a number of sites. For example, each participant uses NetMeeting to connect to computer serving as a central reflector in order to communicate with each other. Because the technology is new and the equipment is not readily available, the reflectors we have had access to have not met our multi-point needs. To support multi-point virtual conferencing, we are currently using the FireTalk application.

Our virtual research consortium uses an online calendar to coordinate our activities. Our calendar is accessible to all participants via a www site.

The virtual calendar serves several purposes. First, it provides an efficient way to schedule meetings and events (face-to-face, phone conference, or virtual conferences-- See Virtual Research Strategy IV). The date and time of the meeting are obvious at a glance. In addition a dialog box can be included that provides information about the agenda, the expected participants, phone numbers, and passwords. Automatic notification of key participants can be managed through the virtual calendar. For example, the morning of a team meeting the virtual calendar is instructed to send out an e-mail announcement to each of the participants.

Second, the virtual calendar supports communication to all participants in the consortium. By accessing the calendar, each participant can monitor ongoing events and the activities. Third, the virtual calendar provides a historical record of the activities of our Virtual Research Center. In this way it supports accountability for preparation of reports and documents.