Longitudinal Speech Recognition Changes After Cochlear Implant: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- PMID: 36004817
- DOI: 10.1002/lary.30354
Longitudinal Speech Recognition Changes After Cochlear Implant: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Abstract
Objectives: To examine patterns of change and plateau in speech recognition scores in postlingually hearing impaired adult cochlear implant recipients. The study also examines variations in change patterns for different speech materials and testing conditions.
Study design: Used systematic review with meta-analysis.
Methods: Articles in English reporting speech recognition scores of adults with postlingual hearing loss at pre-implantation and at least two post-implantation time points were included. Statistically significant changes were determined by meta-analysis and the 95% confidence interval.
Results: A total of 22 articles representing 1954 patients were included. Meta-analysis of mean difference demonstrated significant improvements in speech recognition score for words in quiet (37.4%; 95% confidence interval [34.7%, 40.7%]), sentences in quiet (49.4%; 95% confidence interval [44.9%, 53.9%]), and sentences in noise (30.8%; 95% confidence interval [25.2%, 36.4%]) from pre-op to 3 months. Scores continued to increase from 3 to 12 months but did not reach significance. Similarly, significant improvements from pre-op to 3 months were observed for consonant nucleus consonant (CNC) words in quiet (37.1%; 95% confidence interval [33.8%, 40.4%]), hearing in noise test (HINT) sentences in quiet (46.5%; 95% confidence interval [37.0%, 56.0%]), AzBio sentences in quiet (45.9%; 95% confidence interval [44.2%, 47.5%]), and AzBio sentences in noise (26.4%; 95% confidence interval [18.6%, 34.2%]). HINT sentences in noise demonstrated improvement from pre-op to 3 months (35.1%; 95% confidence interval [30.0%, 40.3%]) and from 3 to 12 months (15.5%; 95% confidence interval [7.2%, 23.8%]).
Conclusions: Mean speech recognition scores demonstrate significant improvement within the first 3 months, with no further statistically significant improvement after 3 months. However, large individual variation should be expected and future research is needed to explain the sources of these individual differences. Laryngoscope, 133:1014-1024, 2023.
Keywords: cochlear implants; longitudinal; meta-analysis; postlingual hearing loss; speech recognition; systematic review.
© 2022 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.
References
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-
- Naples JG, Ruckenstein MJ. Cochlear implant. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2020;53(1):87-102.
-
- McRackan TR, Reddy P, Costello MS, Dubno JR. Role of preoperative patient expectations in adult cochlear implant outcomes. Otol Neurotol. 2021;42(2):e130-e136.
-
- Harris MS, Capretta NR, Henning SC, Feeney L, Pitt MA, Moberly AC. Postoperative rehabilitation strategies used by adults with cochlear implants: a pilot study. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2016;1(3):42-48.
-
- Messersmith JJ, Entwisle L, Warren S, Scott M. Clinical practice guidelines: cochlear implants. J Am Acad Audiol. 2019;30(10):827-844.
-
- Carlson ML. Cochlear implantation in adults. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(16):1531-1542.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
