1-year postactivation results for sequentially implanted bilateral cochlear implant users
- PMID: 17667768
- DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e318067bd24
1-year postactivation results for sequentially implanted bilateral cochlear implant users
Abstract
Objective: Evaluate speech recognition in quiet and in noise for a group of 12 children, all of whom underwent sequential bilateral cochlear implantation at various ages (range, 1 yr, 8 mo to 9 yr, 6 mo at time of second implant).
Study design: Retrospective.
Setting: Outpatient cochlear implant clinic.
Patients: Children who underwent sequential bilateral cochlear implantation.
Intervention: Rehabilitative.
Main outcome measures: Speech recognition in quiet was evaluated for each ear separately using single-word speech recognition assessments (Multisyllabic Lexical Neighborhood Test and Early Speech Perception Test) via recorded presentation. Speech recognition in noise was assessed for each ear separately and in the bilateral condition by obtaining a spondee recognition threshold in the presence of speech-weighted noise presented at 45 dB hearing level. The primary outcome measure for speech recognition in noise assessment was the signal-to-noise ratio for 50% performance, which was calculated by determining the difference between the presentation level of the noise and the presentation level at which the speech recognition threshold was obtained. The results of these assessments were contrasted between children receiving their second cochlear implant before 4 years of age and children receiving their second cochlear implant after 4 years of age.
Results: A statistically significant difference for speech recognition scores in quiet was obtained between the early-implanted ear and the late-implanted ears for children receiving their second cochlear implant after 4 years of age. There was not a statistically significant difference in speech recognition scores in quiet between the early-implanted and late-implanted ears of children receiving their second cochlear before 4 years of age. Both groups of children possessed better speech recognition scores in noise (statistically significant at an alpha = 0.05) in the bilateral condition relative to either unilateral condition. However, there was not a statistically significant relationship between speech recognition performance in noise and the duration of deafness of the later implanted ear.
Conclusion: Bilateral cochlear implantation allowed for better speech recognition in noise relative to unilateral performance for a group of 12 children who underwent sequential bilateral cochlear implantation at various ages. There was not a statistically significant relationship between speech recognition in noise benefit, which was defined as the difference in performance between the first implanted ear and the bilateral condition and the age at which the second implant was received. Children receiving bilateral cochlear implants younger than 4 years of age achieved better speech recognition in quiet performance for the later implanted ear as compared with children receiving their second cochlear implant after 4 year of age.
Similar articles
-
Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults.Otol Neurotol. 2009 Apr;30(3):313-8. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31819bd7e6. Otol Neurotol. 2009. PMID: 19318885
-
Perceptual benefit and functional outcomes for children using sequential bilateral cochlear implants.Ear Hear. 2007 Aug;28(4):470-82. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31806dc194. Ear Hear. 2007. PMID: 17609610
-
Importance of age and postimplantation experience on speech perception measures in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants.Otol Neurotol. 2007 Aug;28(5):649-57. doi: 10.1097/01.mao.0000281807.89938.60. Otol Neurotol. 2007. PMID: 17712290
-
[Cochlear implant in children: rational, indications and cost/efficacy].Minerva Pediatr. 2013 Jun;65(3):325-39. Minerva Pediatr. 2013. PMID: 23685383 Review. Italian.
-
Bilateral cochlear implantation: current concepts.Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009 Oct;17(5):351-5. doi: 10.1097/MOO.0b013e3283301702. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009. PMID: 19606037 Review.
Cited by
-
Cochlear implantation in nontraditional candidates: preliminary results in adolescents with asymmetric hearing loss.Otol Neurotol. 2013 Apr;34(3):408-15. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31827850b8. Otol Neurotol. 2013. PMID: 23222962 Free PMC article.
-
The relationship between binaural benefit and difference in unilateral speech recognition performance for bilateral cochlear implant users.Int J Audiol. 2011 Aug;50(8):554-65. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2011.580785. Epub 2011 Jun 23. Int J Audiol. 2011. PMID: 21696329 Free PMC article.
-
The effects of bilateral electric and bimodal electric--acoustic stimulation on language development.Trends Amplif. 2009 Sep;13(3):190-205. doi: 10.1177/1084713809346160. Epub 2009 Aug 26. Trends Amplif. 2009. PMID: 19713210 Free PMC article.
-
Enduring advantages of early cochlear implantation for spoken language development.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013 Apr;56(2):643-55. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0347). Epub 2012 Dec 28. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013. PMID: 23275406 Free PMC article.
-
William House Cochlear Implant Study Group: position statement on bilateral cochlear implantation.Otol Neurotol. 2008 Feb;29(2):107-8. doi: 10.1097/mao.0b013e318163d2ea. Otol Neurotol. 2008. PMID: 18223440 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous