Consequences of auditory experience and cochlear implant stimulation on tuning and other measures obtained in pre-lingually deaf children and postlingually deaf adults

2019 ◽  
Vol 145 (3) ◽  
pp. 1905-1905
Author(s):  
Julie G. Arenberg ◽  
Kelly N. Jahn ◽  
Lindsay A. Devries ◽  
Mishaela DiNino
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Auditory Experience

scholarly journals Cochlear implantation: a review of the literature and the Nijmegen results

1997 ◽  
Vol 111 (11) ◽  
pp. 1008-1017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Jamal A. Makhdoum ◽  
Ad F. M. Snik ◽  
Paul van den Broek
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Sensorineural Deafness ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Subject Selection ◽  
Profound Deafness ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Adults And Children ◽  
To Receive

AbstractThe field of cochlear implantation is developing rapidly. In subjects with bilateral profound deafness who gain no benefit from conventional hearing aids the aim of cochlear implantation is to provide a means for them to receive auditory sensations. Throughout the world, most cochlear implant centres are still continuing their research efforts to improve the results with this technique. Although it is still difficult to predict how an individual will perform with a cochlear implant, the success of cochlear implantation can no longer be denied. In this paper, we review some recent papers and reports, and the results of the various Nijmegen cochlear implant studies. Data about subject selection, examinations, surgery and the outcome are discussed. Our results were in good agreement with those of other authors. It can be concluded once again that cochlear implantation is an effective treatment for postlingually deaf adults and children, and for prelingually (congenital or acquired) deaf children with profound bilateral sensorineural deafness.

Experiences with the Cochlear Implant in Preschool Children

1983 ◽  
Vol 92 (6) ◽  
pp. 587-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
William F. House ◽  
Karen I. Berliner ◽  
Laurie S. Eisenberg
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Auditory Thresholds ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Long Term Impact ◽  
Speech And Language Development ◽  
Better Than

Years of experience with the cochlear implant in profoundly deaf adults led to a decision to attempt to extend the benefits of this device to children. As of March 15, 1983, 43 deaf children ranging in age from 2.7 to 17.5 years have been implanted. Seventeen of these are children under 6 years of age. All had worn hearing aids but demonstrated little or no benefit from them. Auditory thresholds with the implant are significantly better than those obtained unaided and with hearing aids. Although a longer period of experience is required, the preschool-aged children can eventually make the same auditory discriminations as older children and adults. Long-term impact on speech and language development remains to be determined, but there is already evidence for significant improvement in these areas.

Cochlear implantation in Thailand

1999 ◽  
Vol 113 (6) ◽  
pp. 515-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanate Vaewvichit ◽  
Parinya Luangpitakchumpol
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Single Channel ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Operative Results ◽  
Speech Rehabilitation ◽  
Lip Reading ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Contralateral Ear

AbstractThis article evaluates and compares the benefits of a House/3M single channel cochlear implant or a Nucleus 22-channel cochlear implant on speech recognition in Thai-speaking patients. From 1986–1989, four profoundly deaf adults were implanted with the House/3M prosthesis. Since 1994, nine post-lingually deaf adults and three pre-lingually deaf children have been implanted with the Nucleus prosthesis. One case was implanted with the House/3M prosthesis and in the contralateral ear with the Nucleus prosthesis. The post-operative results were determined according to the ability to understand Thai monosyllabic, bisyllabic open-word sets and everyday sentence tests with, and without, lip reading. The scores were then compared in the House/3M users and the Nucleus users and compared between the House/3M cochlear implant and the Nucleus cochlear implant in the same user. The speech recognition scores on monosyllabic and bisyllabic open-word set demonstrated that the Nucleus users perform at a much higher level than the House/3M users. The results of four pre-lingually deaf children will be reported later after a period of auditory and speech rehabilitation.

Why Are Children with Cochlear Implants at Risk for Executive Functioning Delays?

2020 ◽  
pp. 247-267
Author(s):  
William G. Kronenberger ◽  
David B. Pisoni
Keyword(s):  
Executive Functioning ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Family Environment ◽  
Fluid Intelligence ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Model Research ◽  
Psychosocial Influences ◽  
Auditory Experience

Prelingually deaf children with cochlear implants (CIs) have about 2 to 5 times more risk for delays in specific domains of executive functioning (EF) than normal-hearing (NH) children, with about 25% to 40% of children with CIs showing delays in specific EF subdomains. This chapter reviews the rationale and evidence for two theoretical approaches to explaining this elevated risk for EF delay: language-focused approaches and biopsychosocial systems theories, such as the auditory neurocognitive model. Research supporting language-focused approaches, which attribute risk of EF delays entirely to language delays, has significant limitations. Furthermore, results from an extensive data set of EF outcomes in CI users are inconsistent with language-focused approaches. In contrast, biopsychosocial systems theories, which attribute risk for EF delay to a system of factors, including auditory experience, language, family environment/experiences, fluid intelligence, and psychosocial influences, provide the strongest evidence and potential for explaining EF delays and outcomes in children with CIs.

Use of the Telephone in Prelingually Deaf Children With a Multichannel Cochlear Implant

2001 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Tait ◽  
Thomas P. Nikolopoulos ◽  
Sue Archbold ◽  
Gerard M. O'Donoghue
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Prelingually Deaf

scholarly journals Rapid learning of minimally different words in five- to six-year-old children: effects of acoustic salience and hearing impairment

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 310-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARCEL R. GIEZEN ◽  
PAOLA ESCUDERO ◽  
ANNE E. BAKER
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
Object Matching ◽  
Rapid Learning ◽  
Minimal Pairs

AbstractThis study investigates the role of acoustic salience and hearing impairment in learning phonologically minimal pairs. Picture-matching and object-matching tasks were used to investigate the learning of consonant and vowel minimal pairs in five- to six-year-old deaf children with a cochlear implant (CI), and children of the same age with normal hearing (NH). In both tasks, the CI children showed clear difficulties with learning minimal pairs. The NH children also showed some difficulties, however, particularly in the picture-matching task. Vowel minimal pairs were learned more successfully than consonant minimal pairs, particularly in the object-matching task. These results suggest that the ability to encode phonetic detail in novel words is not fully developed at age six and is affected by task demands and acoustic salience. CI children experience persistent difficulties with accurately mapping sound contrasts to novel meanings, but seem to benefit from the relative acoustic salience of vowel sounds.

scholarly journals Emotion Understanding in Deaf Children with a Cochlear Implant

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. H. Wiefferink ◽  
C. Rieffe ◽  
L. Ketelaar ◽  
L. De Raeve ◽  
J. H. M. Frijns
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Emotion Understanding ◽  
Deaf Children

The Cochlear Implant as an Epistemic Thing

2021 ◽  
pp. 565-581
Author(s):  
Markus Spöhrer
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Technical Stability ◽  
Technical Object ◽  
Scientific Communities ◽  
Successful Communication ◽  
The Social ◽  
Scientific Fact

This chapter examines the translations and (de)stabilizations of the cochlear implant, a subcutaneous prosthesis that is subject to ethical and judicial controversies. By looking at medical, social, and scientific contexts, the CI will be described as a technical object ascribed with certain attributes providing technical stability in those contexts that treat it and practice it as a scientific fact, a “technical thing.” Scientific communities stabilize technical things by rigorously excluding attributes of the “social.” However, the CI is designed to enable participation, to “gap” the supposed “disability” of not being able to hear, attributing a certain instability to it. The chapter will theoretically and methodologically approach such processes of (de)stabilization and transformation by making use of ANT and Hans-Jörg Rheinbergers concept of technical and epistemic things. This will be illustrated by analyzing certain discourses used as illustrations for the successful communication between implanted children and their parents in practical guides for parents with deaf children.

Cochlear Implant Nonuse: Insight from Deaf Adults

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 270-282
Author(s):  
Maryam Salehomoum
Keyword(s):  
Identity Development ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Perceptual Development ◽  
Long Term Outcome ◽  
Deaf Identity ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Insight Into

Abstract Research examining the outcome of pediatric cochlear implantation consists of certain limitations, including the use of assessments that are often restricted to auditory-spoken skills, biased recruitment practices, and lack of consideration for identity development. To better understand the long-term outcome of implantation, it is vital to seek out individuals who decide to stop using their device and elicit feedback related to their decision. Thus, 11 adults, who were past cochlear implant (CI) users, were interviewed to gain insight into factors that had led to their decision regarding cochlear implant nonuse. Results indicated several variables to have played a role, but the most prominent factors were limitations in postimplant auditory perceptual development and development of a d/Deaf identity. Although cochlear implant practices and technology have improved over the past few decades, we need to recognize the continued variability in outcome to ensure the provision of the most accurate information and appropriate services.

Literature overview on P3 measurement as an objective measure of auditory performance in post-lingually deaf adults with a cochlear implant

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (12) ◽  
pp. 816-823 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laure Jacquemin ◽  
Griet Mertens ◽  
Winfried Schlee ◽  
Paul Van de Heyning ◽  
Annick Gilles
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Literature Overview ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Auditory Performance
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document