Delaying Cochlear Implantation Impacts Postoperative Speech Perception of Nontraditional Pediatric Candidates

被引:5
作者
Park, Lisa R. [1 ]
Perkins, Elizabeth L. [2 ]
Woodard, Jennifer S. [1 ]
Brown, Kevin D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
[2] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, 221 Kirkland Hall, Nashville, TN 37235 USA
关键词
Hearing loss; Children; Word recognition; Cochlear implant candidacy; SPOKEN LANGUAGE-DEVELOPMENT; COMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT; CHILDREN; HEARING; AGE; RECEIVE; OUTCOMES; YOUNGER;
D O I
10.1159/000510693
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
Introduction: As pediatric cochlear implant (CI) candidacy expands, children with greater degrees of residual hearing are receiving CIs. These nontraditional candidates have audiometric thresholds that meet adult manufacturer labeling but are better than current pediatric guidelines allow. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of delayed cochlear implantation on speech perception in nontraditional pediatric CI recipients. Methods: Pediatric CI recipients with a history of progressive hearing loss and a preoperative 4-frequency pure-tone average of <= 75 dB HL at the time of implantation were considered for this retrospective study. Preoperative serial audiograms and word recognition scores were reviewed, and a method was created to establish a date when each individual ear 1st met nontraditional candidacy. The length of time between the date of candidacy and implantation was calculated and defined as the "delay time." A multiple linear regression investigated delay time, age at surgery, surgery type (1st vs. 2nd side), and array type as predictive factors of maximum postoperative Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word scores. A one-way ANCOVA was performed comparing the postoperative CNC scores between subjects grouped by delay time. Results: A significant regression was found (F(4, 38) = 5.167, p = 0.002, R-2 = 0.353). Both age at implantation (p = 0.023) and delay time (p = 0.002) predicted CNC word scores. Longer delay time was associated with poorer word recognition scores, while older age at implantation correlated with higher CNC word scores in this progressive hearing loss group. A significant difference was noted between subjects implanted with <1 year of delay and those with 3 or more years of delay (p = 0.003). All ears implanted within a year of candidacy achieved word recognition abilities that are generally accepted as above average (M = 84.91). Conclusion: CI candidacy for adults has evolved to allow for greater degrees of residual hearing, while audiometric guidelines for children have not changed since 2000. Our findings suggest that delay of cochlear implantation, even for children with significant levels of residual hearing, leads to poorer outcomes. Modified candidacy guidelines for children should be established to expedite referral to multidisciplinary CI teams and minimize delays in this population.
引用
收藏
页码:182 / 187
页数:6
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Survey of the American Neurotology Society on Cochlear Implantation: Part 1, Candidacy Assessment and Expanding Indications
    Carlson, Matthew L.
    Sladen, Douglas P.
    Gurgel, Richard K.
    Tombers, Nicole M.
    Lohse, Christine M.
    Driscoll, Colin L.
    [J]. OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2018, 39 (01) : E12 - E19
  • [2] Carlson ML, 2015, OTOL NEUROTOL, V36, P43, DOI 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000607
  • [3] Age at Intervention for Permanent Hearing Loss and 5-Year Language Outcomes
    Ching, Teresa Y. C.
    Dillon, Harvey
    Button, Laura
    Seeto, Mark
    Van Buynder, Patricia
    Marnane, Vivienne
    Cupples, Linda
    Leigh, Greg
    [J]. PEDIATRICS, 2017, 140 (03)
  • [4] Outcomes of Early- and Late-Identified Children at 3 Years of Age: Findings From a Prospective Population-Based Study
    Ching, Teresa Y. C.
    Dillon, Harvey
    Marnane, Vivienne
    Hou, Sanna
    Day, Julia
    Seeto, Mark
    Crowe, Kathryn
    Street, Laura
    Thomson, Jessica
    Van Buynder, Patricia
    Zhang, Vicky
    Wong, Angela
    Burns, Lauren
    Flynn, Christopher
    Cupples, Linda
    Cowan, Robert S. C.
    Leigh, Greg
    Sjahalam-King, Jessica
    Yeh, Angel
    [J]. EAR AND HEARING, 2013, 34 (05) : 535 - 552
  • [5] Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification
    Ching, TYC
    Dillon, H
    Byrne, D
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1998, 103 (02) : 1128 - 1140
  • [6] Cochlear implants for children with significant residual hearing
    Dettman, S
    D'Costa, WA
    Dowell, RC
    Winton, EJ
    Hill, KL
    Williams, SS
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, 2004, 130 (05) : 612 - 618
  • [7] Communication development in children who receive the cochlear implant younger than 12 months: Risks versus benefits
    Dettman, Shani J.
    Pinder, Darren
    Briggs, Robert J. S.
    Dowell, Richard C.
    Leigh, Jaime R.
    [J]. EAR AND HEARING, 2007, 28 (02) : 11S - 18S
  • [8] Long-term Communication Outcomes for Children Receiving Cochlear Implants Younger Than 12 Months: A Multicenter Study
    Dettman, Shani Joy
    Dowell, Richard Charles
    Choo, Dawn
    Arnott, Wendy
    Abrahams, Yetta
    Davis, Aleisha
    Dornan, Dimity
    Leigh, Jaime
    Constantinescu, Gabriella
    Cowan, Robert
    Briggs, Robert J.
    [J]. OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2016, 37 (02) : E82 - E95
  • [9] Pediatric cochlear implantation: How much hearing is too much?
    Fitzpatrick, Elizabeth
    Olds, Janet
    Durieux-Smith, Andree
    McCrae, Rosemary
    Schramm, David
    Gaboury, Isabelle
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2009, 48 (02) : 91 - 97
  • [10] Pediatric Cochlear Implantation: Why Do Children Receive Implants Late?
    Fitzpatrick, Elizabeth M.
    Ham, Julia
    Whittingham, JoAnne
    [J]. EAR AND HEARING, 2015, 36 (06) : 688 - 694