Postoperative Speech Perception Results for 92 European Children Using the Nucleus Mini System 22 Cochlear Implant

J, Reid; Lehnhardt, Monika

doi:10.1159/000422591

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The influence of demographic factors on weak syllable processing was investigated because of the influence of such factors on other spoken language outcomes in children who use CI (age at testing, age at onset of deafness, duration of deafness, duration of device use, mode of communication, gender, number of active electrodes, age of implantation, aetiology, and hearing thresholds: Pisoni & Cleary, 2003;Osberger et al, 1991;Kirk et al, 2002;Reid & Lehnhardt, 1994;Osberger, Robbins, Todd, Riley, & Miyamoto, 1994;Geers, 1997;Lö hle et al, 1999;Kirk, 2000), and because the preferential processing of footed over unfooted weak syllables appears be a developmental phenomenon in children with NH (Gerken, 1994 a, b;Demuth, 1996;Fee, 1997). Both groups of children with NH in the current study, and both groups of CI users were merged for this analysis.…”

Section: Relationship Of Footed and Unfooted Component Scores To Demomentioning

confidence: 99%

An investigation of weak syllable processing in deaf children with cochlear implants

Titterington¹,

Henry

Krämer

et al. 2006

Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study the influence of prosodic foot structure on the processing of weak syllables in children with cochlear implants (CI) was investigated. A battery of tests investigating processing of weak syllables in single and multi-word utterances was carried out on four groups of children: 15 children with CI developing spoken language as expected (Main CI); five children with CI reported to have additional speech and language problems; 15 age matched; and 15 language matched (LM) children with normal hearing (NH). Children in the main CI and, to a lesser extent, the LM groups processed footed weak syllables preferably over unfooted weak syllables (particularly as memory load increased). Thus, these children with CI appear to possess a similar Prosodic Hierarchy (PH) to their LM peers with NH, and possibly due to the impact of delayed and constrained exposure to audition on the development of linguistic processing and short-term memory, are influenced by its foot structure in the processing of weak syllables.

show abstract

Section: Relationship Of Footed and Unfooted Component Scores To Demomentioning

confidence: 99%

An investigation of weak syllable processing in deaf children with cochlear implants

Titterington¹,

Henry

Krämer

et al. 2006

Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is a computerized, interactive test including a battery of subsets with increasing difficulty. Based on the classification of hearing capacities by Erber [8], it was derived from two other testbatteries, the EARS test battery (Evaluation of Auditory Responses to Speech) [9] and the TAPS (Test of Auditory Perception of Speech) [10]. The test comprises detection tasks of phonemes and environmental sounds, identification tasks for environmental sounds, prosodic features of speech (syllable patterns) as well as for words (mono-, bi-and trisyllabic words) and sentences.…”

Section: The 'Frankfurt' Functional Hearing Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Results of Pediatric Cochlear Implantation Compared with Results Obtained with Hearing Aids

Kiefer¹,

Pfennigdorff²,

Spelsberg³

et al. 1999

Otorhinolaryngol Nova

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The performance of cochlear implanted children was evaluated in comparison with results of children wearing hearing aids. Patients and Methods: 88 cochlear implanted children were included in this study. Onset of deafness was prelingual (except 1 perilingual), mean age at implantation was 5.4 years (range 1–17.2), preoperative pure tone average (PTA) ranged from 130 to 83 dB HL in the better ear with a mean value of 110.5 dB HL. The hearing aid group consisted of 34 children with prelingual onset of hearing loss. PTA ranged from 122 to 46 dB HL, mean age at test was 5.3 years (range 1.3–15.4). The ‘Frankfurt Functional Hearing Test’ was used for evaluation. Based on the results of the hearing aid group, predicted performance with hearing aids was calculated individually for all cochlear implanted children and compared to the actual results with cochlear implants. Results and Conclusions: Results of cochlear implanted children improved steadily after implantation, progressing from a compound score of 22% prior to implantation to 72.2% after 4–9 years. Actual performance with cochlear implants was significantly better than predicted values with hearing aids. Children implanted prior to age 6 showed a greater benefit and faster improvements after implantation than children implanted later. The performance of children implanted beween age 2 and 4 was equivalent to the mean performance of children with hearing loss of 70–85 dB wearing hearing aids.

show abstract

Cochlear Implants for Adult Prelingually Deaf Patients

Ito¹,

Fujino²,

Shiomi³

et al. 1994

Nippon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have performed cochlear implants on 6 adult prelingually deaf patients and obtained the following results. 1) The speech comprehension ability of the adult prelingually deaf patients was poorer than in postlingually deaf patients, but some patients showed better results than expected. 2) The adult prelingually deaf patients required a longer period of rehabilitation than the postlingually deaf patients. There were considerable variations in performance among the adult prelingually deaf patients.

show abstract

Postoperative Speech Perception Results for 92 European Children Using the Nucleus Mini System 22 Cochlear Implant

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

An investigation of weak syllable processing in deaf children with cochlear implants

An investigation of weak syllable processing in deaf children with cochlear implants

Results of Pediatric Cochlear Implantation Compared with Results Obtained with Hearing Aids

Cochlear Implants for Adult Prelingually Deaf Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About