Search

Objective: Cochlear implant (CI) candidacy and postoperative outcomes are assessed using sets of speech perception tests that vary from center to center, limiting comparisons across institutions and time periods. The objective of this study was to determine if scores on one speech perception test could be reliably predicted from scores on another test., Study Design: Arizona Biomedical (AzBio) Sentence Test, Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant word (CNCw), and Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) scores in quiet for the implanted ear were collected for individuals who received a CI between 1985 and 2019. Scores collected during the same testing session were analyzed using Bland-Altman plots to assess agreement between testing methods. Simple linear regression with logit transformation was used to generate predictive functions and 95% confidence intervals for expected mean and individual scores., Setting: Single academic medical center., Patients: A total of 1,437 individuals with a median age of 59.9 years (range, 18-95 yr) and 46% (654 of 1,437) male., Interventions: N.A., Main Outcome Measures: Agreement as a function of test score, mean, variance, and correlation coefficients., Results: A total of 2,052 AzBio/CNCw, 525 AzBio/HINT, and 7,187 CNCw/HINT same-session score pairings were identified. Pairwise test comparisons demonstrated limited agreement between different tests performed in the same session, and a score correlation between different speech tests revealed large variances., Conclusion: Transformation functions between test batteries were predictive of mean scores but performed poorly for prediction of individual scores. Point-wise comparisons of scores across CI test batteries should be used with caution in clinical and research settings., Competing Interests: The authors disclose no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.)

Objective: The cochlear implant (CI) has been shown to be associated with better hearing, cognitive abilities, and functional independence. There is variability however in how much benefit each recipient derives from his or her CI. This study's primary objective is to determine the effects of individual and environmental characteristics on CI outcomes., Design: Seventy-six adults who developed postlingual severe to profound hearing loss and received their first unilateral CI at 65 years and older were eligible for the study. Fifty-five patients were asked to participate and the 33 (60%) with complete data were classified as "group 1." The remaining patients were placed in "group 2." Primary outcomes included changes in quality of life and open-set speech perception scores. Independent variables included age, health status, trait emotional intelligence (EI), comfort with technology, and living arrangements. Survey outcomes and audiological measurements were collected prospectively at 12 months after surgery, whereas preoperative data were collected retrospectively. Comparisons between groups 1 and 2 were made. Wilcoxon signed rank test, Spearman correlations, Mann-Whitney tests, Chi-square tests, and linear regressions were performed only on group 1 data., Results: Having a CI was associated with improved quality of life and speech perception. Familiarity with electronic tablets was associated with increased 12-month postoperative AzBio gains when adjusted for preoperative AzBio scores (adjusted p = 0.019), but only marginally significant when a family-wise error correction was applied (p = 0.057). Furthermore, patients who lived with other people scored at least 20 points higher on the AzBio sentences than those who lived alone (adjusted p = 0.046). Finally, consultation with an auditory rehabilitation therapist was associated with higher self-reported quality of life (p = 0.035)., Conclusion: This study suggests that in a cohort of older patients cochlear implantation is associated with a meaningful increase in both quality of life and speech perception. Furthermore, it suggests the potential importance of adjunct support and services, including the tailoring of CI rehabilitation sessions depending on the patient's familiarity with technology and living situation. Investment in rehabilitation and other services is associated with improvements in quality of life and may mitigate clinical, individual and social risk factors for poor communication outcome.

Objective: An aging American population carries a high prevalence of profound sensorineural hearing loss. We examined the performance of multichannel cochlear implant recipients in a large database of adult subjects., Design: Nonconcurrent prospective study of a national cohort with multivariate regression analysis of preoperative and postoperative performance variables in multichannel cochlear implant recipients. We applied models of prediction established in previous studies to the observed results., Setting: Referral centers with active cochlear implant programs., Patients: Adolescents and adults with profound hearing loss (N = 749; age range, 14-91 years)., Main Outcome Measure: Postoperative monosyllabic word recognition., Results: The population 65 years and older demonstrated a clinically insignificant 4.6%-smaller postoperative word score compared with the population younger than 65 years. When duration of deafness exceeded 25 years, elderly recipients demonstrated higher word scores than their younger counterparts. A more significant factor affecting outcomes is the ratio of duration of deafness to age at implantation., Conclusions: Age at implantation carried relatively little predictive value for postoperative performance in subjects 65 years and older. Although a small decrement in mean speech recognition scores was evident, the clinical significance of this difference is questionable when all of the results observed in elderly patients are considered. A shorter percentage of life spent in severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss suggests a foundation of acoustic/auditory processing in the elderly cohort that may mitigate potential physiological effects associated with advanced age. This study confirms and extends previous observations that duration of profound deafness and residual speech recognition carry higher predictive value than the age at which an individual receives an implant.

Objectives/hypothesis: The study tested the hypothesis that among patients with similar levels of residual hearing in the nonimplanted ear, speech perception outcome is the same whether or not the implanted ear has profound or severe levels of hearing loss., Study Design: Retrospective., Methods: Levels of hearing loss in postlingually deafened adults who had cochlear implantation at Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, MD) between 1991 and 2002 were classified according to pure-tone averages as bilateral severe (n = 20), severe-profound (severe in one ear and profound in the other) (n = 23), and bilateral profound (n = 43). There was no significant difference in the age at onset and duration of deafness among the three patient groups. Individuals in the bilateral severe and severe-profound groups had comparable levels of severe hearing loss in their nonimplanted ears, whereas those in severe-profound and bilateral profound groups had comparable levels of profound hearing loss in their implanted ears. Speech perception performance was evaluated using words from the Consonant Nucleus Consonant word list, Hearing in Noise Test sentences in quiet, and Central Institute for the Deaf sentences through recorded presentation at 70 dB sound pressure level (SPL)., Results: Despite the profound hearing loss of the implanted ear in the asymmetrical group, there was no significant difference in mean speech perception scores compared with the bilateral severe group within the first year after implant surgery. By comparison, the bilateral profound group had lower speech perception results compared with patients with residual hearing in one or both ears., Conclusion: The study results suggest that implantation of the profoundly deafened ear does not diminish the functional advantage conferred by residual hearing in a patient with asymmetrical hearing loss. Therefore, the central auditory pathway may be the site at which persistent auditory function has its most beneficial effects.

Background: This study explored factors associated with speech recognition outcomes in postmeningitic deafness (PMD). The results of cochlear implantation may vary in children with PMD because of sequelae that extend beyond the auditory periphery., Objective: To determine which factors might be most determinative of outcome of cochlear implantation in children with PMD., Design: Retrospective chart review., Setting: A referral center for pediatric cochlear implantation and rehabilitation., Subjects: Thirty children with cochlear implants who were deafened by meningitis were matched with subjects who were deafened by other causes based on the age at diagnosis, age at cochlear implantation, age at which hearing aids were first used, and method of communication used at home or in the classroom., Main Outcome Measure: Speech perception performance within the first 2 years after cochlear implantation and its relationship with presurgical cognitive measures and medical history., Results: There was no difference in the overall cognitive or postoperative speech perception performance between the children with PMD and those deafened by other causes. The presence of postmeningitic hydrocephalus, however, posed greater challenges to the rehabilitation process, as indicated by significantly smaller gains in speech perception and a predilection for behavioral problems. By comparison, cochlear scarring and incomplete electrode insertion had no impact on speech perception results., Conclusions: Although the results demonstrated no significant delay in cognitive or speech perception performance in the PMD group, central nervous system residua, when present, can impede the acquisition of speech perception with a cochlear implant. Central effects associated with PMD may thus impact language learning potential; cognitive and behavioral therapy should be considered in rehabilitative planning and in establishing expectations of outcome.