Associations between Auditory Capacity, Speech and Language, Level of Communication and Parental Assessment of Children with Cochlear Implant

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lone Percy-Smith
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Language Level ◽  
Parental Assessment

Speech and Language Results in Children with a Cochlear Implant

1985 ◽  
Vol 6 (SUPPLEMENT) ◽  
pp. 36S-47S ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen ller Kirk ◽  
Carolyn Hill-Brown
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Speech And Language

Pediatric Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Minimum Test Battery and Referral Criteria for Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation

2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982110273
Author(s):  
Samantha Anne ◽  
Kevin D. Brown ◽  
Donald M. Goldberg ◽  
Oliver F. Adunka ◽  
Margaret Kenna ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech And Language Development

Among the various cochlear implant systems approved by the Food and Drug Administration, current labeling for pediatric usage encompasses (1) bilateral profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss in children aged 9 to 24 months and bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in children older than 2 years; (2) use of appropriately fitted hearing aids for 3 months (this can be waived if there is evidence of ossification); and (3) demonstration of limited progress with auditory, speech, and language development. Pediatric guidelines require children to have significantly worse speech understanding before qualifying for cochlear implantation. The early years of life have been shown to be critical for speech and language development, and auditory deprivation is especially detrimental during this crucial time. Level of evidence: 2.

scholarly journals Therapist-Guided Telerehabilitation for Adult Cochlear Implant Users: Developmental and Feasibility Study

10.2196/15843 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e15843 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiane Völter ◽  
Christiane Schirmer ◽  
Dorothee Hinsen ◽  
Marieke Roeber ◽  
Stefan Dazert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
International Classification Of Functioning ◽  
Short Version ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Age Related ◽  
System Usability Scale ◽  
Cochlear Implant User

Background Cochlear implants can provide auditory perception to many people with hearing impairment who derive insufficient benefits from hearing aid use. For optimal speech perception with a cochlear implant, postoperative auditory training is necessary to adapt the brain to the new sound transmitted by the implant. Currently, this training is usually conducted via face-to-face sessions in rehabilitation centers. With the aging of society, the prevalence of age-related hearing loss and the number of adults with cochlear implants are expected to increase. Therefore, augmenting face-to-face rehabilitation with alternative forms of auditory training may be highly valuable. Objective The purpose of this multidisciplinary study was to evaluate the newly developed internet-based teletherapeutic multimodal system Train2hear, which enables adult cochlear implant users to perform well-structured and therapist-guided hearing rehabilitation sessions on their own. Methods The study was conducted in 3 phases: (1) we searched databases from January 2005 to October 2018 for auditory training programs suitable for adult cochlear implant users; (2) we developed a prototype of Train2hear based on speech and language development theories; (3) 18 cochlear implant users (mean age 61, SD 15.4 years) and 10 speech and language therapists (mean age 34, SD 10.9 years) assessed the usability and the feasibility of the prototype. This was achieved via questionnaires, including the System Usability Scale (SUS) and a short version of the intrinsic motivation inventory (KIM) questionnaires. Results The key components of the Train2hear training program are an initial analysis according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health; a range of different hierarchically based exercises; and an automatic and dynamic adaptation of the different tasks according to the cochlear implant user’s progress. In addition to motivational mechanisms (such as supportive feedback), the cochlear implant user and therapist receive feedback in the form of comprehensive statistical analysis. In general, cochlear implant users enjoyed their training as assessed by KIM scores (mean 19, SD 2.9, maximum 21). In terms of usability (scale 0-100), the majority of users rated the Train2hear program as excellent (mean 88, SD 10.5). Age (P=.007) and sex (P=.01) had a significant impact on the SUS score with regard to usability of the program. The therapists (SUS score mean 93, SD 9.2) provided slightly more positive feedback than the cochlear implant users (mean 85, SD 10.3). Conclusions Based on this first evaluation, Train2hear was well accepted by both cochlear implant users and therapists. Computer-based auditory training might be a promising cost-effective option that can provide a highly personalized rehabilitation program suited to individual cochlear implant user characteristics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document