Subscribe to RSS
Comparison of Speech Perception Abilities of Children using Bimodal Hearing with Children using Cochlear Implant Alone
Introduction There are very few studies comparing speech perception abilities of children using bimodal hearing over monaural cochlear implant and factors related to benefit of bimodal hearing. The aim of this study is to compare speech perception abilities of children using bimodal fitting versus children using cochlear implant alone and explore factors related to benefit of bimodal hearing.
Materials and Methods In the present study, 20 cochlear implantees with the hearing age range of 3 to 8 years were included. Speech perception performance was assessed by means of Parent’s Evaluation of Aural/Oral Performance of Children scale and early speech perception (ESP) test: Pattern Perception Words, Monosyllabic Words, Bisyllabic, and Trisyllabic Words Identification test. ESP test was carried out in two conditions cochlear implant with hearing aid in opposite ear (CIHA), bimodal, and cochlear implant (CI) alone. Aided audiometry was also carried out in above mentioned two conditions.
Results and Discussion On aided audiometry test, aided thresholds were improved by 5 to 6 dB in CIHA condition as compared to CI alone condition in 14 out of 20 children. Whereas on speech perception test, there was a significant improvement of 15 to 20% on domains of ESP test in these children. Factors such as implant age, chronological age, and number of hours of hearing aid usage were not significantly associated with benefit. Nevertheless aided threshold at 4,000 Hz was found to be significantly associated with bimodal benefit.
Conclusion Bimodal hearing is beneficial in most of the children than monaural hearing through cochlear implant.
02 September 2020 (online)
© 2020. Indian Society of Otology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
- 1 Silman S, Gelfand SA, Silverman CA. Late-onset auditory deprivation: effects of monaural versus binaural hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1984; 76 (05) 1357-1362
- 2 Byrne D, Dirks D. Effects of acclimatization and deprivation on non-speech auditory abilities. Ear Hear 1996; DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199617031-00004.
- 3 Miller AL. Effects of chronic stimulation on auditory nerve survival in ototoxically deafened animals. Hear Res 2001; 151 (1-2) 1-14
- 4 Dunn CC, Tyler RS, Witt SA. Benefit of wearing a hearing aid on the unimplanted ear in adult users of a cochlear implant. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2005; 48 (03) 668-680
- 5 Ching TYC, van Wanrooy E, Hill M, Incerti P. Performance in children with hearing aids or cochlear implants: bilateral stimulation and binaural hearing. Int J Audiol 2006; 45 (Suppl. 01) S108-S112
- 6 Gordon KA, Daya H, Harrison RV, Papsin BC. Factors contributing to limited open-set speech perception in children who use a cochlear implant. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2000; 56 (02) 101-111
- 7 Armstrong M, Pegg P, James C, Blamey P. Speech perception in noise with implant and hearing aid. Am J Otol 1997; 18 (Suppl. 06) S140-S141
- 8 Ching TYC, Incerti P, Hill M. Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear Hear 2004; 25 (01) 9-21
- 9 Fitzpatrick E, McCrae R, Schramm D. A retrospective study of cochlear implant outcomes in children with residual hearing. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord 2006; 6: 7
- 10 Dunn CC, Perreau A, Gantz B, Tyler RS. Benefits of localization and speech perception with multiple noise sources in listeners with a short-electrode cochlear implant. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21 (01) 44-51
- 11 Hua H, Johansson B, Jönsson R, Magnusson L. Cochlear implant combined with a linear frequency transposing hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (09) 722-732
- 12 Cutler A, Sebastian-Galles N, Soler-Vilageliu O, Van Ooijen B. Constraints of vowels and consonants on lexical selection: cross-linguistic comparisons. Mem Cogn 2000; DOI: 10.3758/BF03198409.
- 13 Bonatti LL, Peña M, Nespor M, Mehler J. Linguistic constraints on statistical computations: the role of consonants and vowels in continuous speech processing. Psychol Sci 2005; 16 (06) 451-459
- 14 Owren MJ, Cardillo GC. The relative roles of vowels and consonants in discriminating talker identity versus word meaning. J Acoust Soc Am 2006; 119 (03) 1727-1739
- 15 Mok M, Galvin KL, Dowell RC, McKay CM. Speech perception benefit for children with a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears and children with bilateral cochlear mplants. Audiol Neurotol 2010; 15 (01) 44-56
- 16 Ching TYC, Psarros C, Hill M, Dillon H, Incerti P. Should children who use cochlear implants wear hearing aids in the opposite ear?. Ear Hear 2001; 22 (05) 365-380