Sound localising ability in children with bilateral sequential cochlear implants

Strøm-Roum, Henrik; Rødvik, Arne Kirkhorn; Osnes, Terje; Fagerland, Morten Wang; Wie, Ona Bø

doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.05.013

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As in the current study, they did not find a significant relationship between age at CI2 and word recognition in noise. Results from Strom-Roum, Rodvik, et al (2012) differed from the current study. They found that a shorter time between surgeries correlated with the amount of bilateral benefit after 12 months of bilateral experience, but this correlation was not present at the 24-month test interval.…”

Section: Effect Of Time-based Factors and Hearing Aid Usecontrasting

confidence: 99%

A Longitudinal Study in Children With Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implants: Time Course for the Second Implanted Ear and Bilateral Performance

Reeder

Firszt

Cadieux

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a Purpose: Whether, and if so when, a second-ear cochlear implant should be provided to older, unilaterally implanted children is an ongoing clinical question. This study evaluated rate of speech recognition progress for the second implanted ear and with bilateral cochlear implants in older sequentially implanted children and evaluated localization abilities. Method: A prospective longitudinal study included 24 bilaterally implanted children (mean ear surgeries at 5.11 and 14.25 years). Test intervals were every 3-6 months through 24 months postbilateral. Test conditions were each ear and bilaterally for speech recognition and localization.Results: Overall, the rate of progress for the second implanted ear was gradual. Improvements in quiet continued through the second year of bilateral use. Improvements in noise were more modest and leveled off during the second year. On all measures, results from the second ear were poorer than the first. Bilateral scores were better than either ear alone for all measures except sentences in quiet and localization. Conclusions: Older sequentially implanted children with several years between surgeries may obtain speech understanding in the second implanted ear; however, performance may be limited and rate of progress gradual. Continued contralateral ear hearing aid use and reduced time between surgeries may enhance outcomes. Bilateral cochlear implantation in children has become more prevalent (Peters, Wyss, & Manrique, 2010) with sequential implantation more common than simultaneous procedures. The dominance of sequential implantation has been driven by the many unilateral pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients who were implanted before bilateral implantation was considered and the fact that worldwide, the majority of children continue to be implanted unilaterally (Cullington, Bele, Brinton, & Lutman, 2013;Peters et al., 2010). During the decision process for individual children about second-side implantation, clinicians and families must consider the type and extent of benefit to be expected, for both the second implanted ear and bilaterally, and the rate of improvement to expect after varied years of unilateral CI experience.Pediatric studies have focused on bilateral compared with unilateral performance in the same individual using one of three study designs: bilateral compared with the first implanted (CI1) ear, bilateral compared to the better performing ear (Galvin, Mok, & Dowell, 2007;Kim et al., 2009;Kühn-Inacker, Shehata-Dieler, Müller, & Helms, 2004;Wolfe et al., 2007), or bilateral compared with each ear individually (Galvin, Hughes, & Mok, 2010;Galvin, Mok, Dowell, & Briggs, 2008;Peters, Litovsky, Parkinson, & Lake, 2007;Steffens et al., 2008; for reviews of pediatric sequential bilateral studies, see Dowell et al., 2011;Johnston, Durieux-Smith, Angus, O'Connor, & Fitzpatrick, 2009;Lammers, Venekamp, Grolman, & van der Heijden, 2014;Sparreboom et al., 2010). Most published studies report results from a single time point with participants having varied amounts ...

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Time-based Factors and Hearing Aid Usecontrasting

confidence: 99%

A Longitudinal Study in Children With Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implants: Time Course for the Second Implanted Ear and Bilateral Performance

Reeder

Firszt

Cadieux

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It may seem reasonable to define an age at which bilateral implantation should not proceed. However, while benefits from bilateral implantation in children can decline with age [13, 59, 71–77], there are many associated time-based issues to address. Consider for example, the suggestion by Graham and colleagues that adolescents should not be provided with a second cochlear implant [77].…”

Section: Considerations Regarding Auditory Plasticitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Bilateral cochlear implants in children: Effects of auditory experience and deprivation on auditory perception

Litovsky

Gordon

2016

Hearing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial hearing skills are essential for children as they grow, learn and play. They provide critical cues for determining the locations of sources in the environment, and enable segregation of important sources, such as speech, from background maskers or interferers. Spatial hearing depends on availability of monaural cues and binaural cues. The latter result from integration of inputs arriving at the two ears from sounds that vary in location. The binaural system has exquisite mechanisms for capturing differences between the ears in both time of arrival and intensity. The major cues that are thus referred to as being vital for binaural hearing are: interaural differences in time (ITDs) and interaural differences in levels (ILDs). In children with normal hearing (NH), spatial hearing abilities are fairly well developed by age 4–5 years. In contrast, children who are deaf and hear through cochlear implants (CIs) do not have an opportunity to experience normal, binaural acoustic hearing early in life. These children may function by having to utilize auditory cues that are degraded with regard to numerous stimulus features. In recent years there has been a notable increase in the number of children receiving bilateral CIs, and evidence suggests that while having two CIs helps them function better than when listening through a single CI, they generally perform worse than their NH peers. This paper reviews some of the recent work on bilaterally implanted children. The focus is on measures of spatial hearing, including sound localization, release from masking for speech understanding in noise and binaural sensitivity using research processors. Data from behavioral and electrophysiological studies are included, with a focus on the recent work of the authors and their collaborators. The effects of auditory plasticity and deprivation on the emergence of binaural and spatial hearing are discussed along with evidence for reorganized processing from both behavioral and electrophysiological studies. The consequences of both unilateral and bilateral auditory deprivation during development suggest that the relevant set of issues is highly complex with regard to successes and the limitations experienced by children receiving bilateral cochlear implants.

show abstract

“…Of these, four studies fulfilled our criteria for the review on the effectiveness of simultaneous versus sequential cochlear implantation, 9,[12][13][14] while nineteen articles were found to be suitable to answer our study question regarding inter-implant interval and/ or the age at second cochlear implantation. 5,9,12,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] Two studies reported data that could be used for both our questions. 9,12 Hence, 21 studies qualified for risk of bias assessment and further analyses.…”

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After screening their title and abstract, 96 of these remained for assessment of their full text. Of these, four studies fulfilled our criteria for the review on the effectiveness of simultaneous versus sequential cochlear implantation, , while nineteen articles were found to be suitable to answer our study question regarding inter‐implant interval and/or the age at second cochlear implantation . Two studies reported data that could be used for both our questions .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bilateral cochlear implantation in children and the impact of the inter‐implant interval

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Sound localising ability in children with bilateral sequential cochlear implants

Cited by 14 publications

References 11 publications

A Longitudinal Study in Children With Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implants: Time Course for the Second Implanted Ear and Bilateral Performance

A Longitudinal Study in Children With Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implants: Time Course for the Second Implanted Ear and Bilateral Performance

Bilateral cochlear implants in children: Effects of auditory experience and deprivation on auditory perception

Bilateral cochlear implantation in children and the impact of the inter‐implant interval

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About