What can we expect of normally-developing children implanted at a young age with respect to their auditory, linguistic and cognitive skills?

Wieringen, Astrid Van; Wouters, Jan

doi:10.1016/j.heares.2014.09.002

Cited by 69 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is estimated that 30 to 40% of children with profound deafness have additional disabilities [1,73,74], which is slightly higher than the 24% prevalence in this study population. In an outcome study of 119 three year old children with hearing loss and additional disabilities, of whom 29% were CI users, speech intelligibility ratings revealed relatively poor outcomes, with a mean rating of 4.2 on a scale from 1 to 6, where 1 represents 100% intelligibility [42].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Predictors of pediatric cochlear implantation outcomes in South Africa

Roux

Vinck

Butler

et al. 2016

International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To identify and describe predictors of pediatric cochlear implantation outcomes in a South African population. Methods:A retrospective study of 301 pediatric CI recipients from five cochlear implant programs was conducted and cross-sectional outcome data were added at the time of data collection. Twenty potential prognostic factors were identified from the retrospective dataset, including biographical, cochlear implant (CI), family and risk factors. Multiple regression analyses was performed to identify predictor variables that influence outcomes in terms of auditory performance (CAP scores), speech production (SIR scores), communication mode and educational placement.Results: Although implanted children within this sample did not have equal opportunity to access a second implant, bilateral implantation was strongly predictive of better auditory performance and speech production scores, an oral mode of communication and mainstream education. NICU admittance/ prematurity were associated with poorer auditory performance and speech production scores, together with a higher probability for non-oral communication and non-mainstream education. The presence of one or more additional developmental 2 condition was predictive of poorer outcomes in terms of speech production and educational placement, while a delay between diagnosis and implantation of more than one year was also related to non-mainstream education. Ethnicities other than Caucasian were predictive of poorer auditory performance scores and a lower probability for mainstream education.Conclusion: An extensive range of prognostic indicators were identified for pediatric CI outcomes in South Africa. These predictive factors of better and poorer outcomes should guide pediatric CI services to promote optimal outcomes and assist professionals in providing evidence-based informational counselling.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Predictors of pediatric cochlear implantation outcomes in South Africa

Roux

Vinck

Butler

et al. 2016

International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The objective of this study is the assessment of the long‐term outcomes of children who were implanted during what is considered the most sensitive period for language development, the age of =<24 months, a determination based on several outcome reports that found that the language outcomes were poorer for children implanted at >24 months than for those implanted before their second birthday . These empirical observations are congruent with other sensitive period studies .…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Language development in the pediatric cochlear implant patient

Ruben

2018

Laryngoscope Investig Oto

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo access the long‐term outcomes of children implanted during most sensitive period for language development.Study designLiterature review.MethodAn initial PubMed search was carried out using the search terms language development and cochlear implant resulted in 1149 citations. A second search was carried out on the initial citations using the criterion of implantation in the period of birth to 24 months, which identified 386 articles. These were analyzed to determine those studies in which linguistic outcome was measured at least three or more years following implantation.ResultsTwenty‐one reports published from 2004 to 2017 that met the criteria. The range of follow‐up was from 3 years to an excess of 10 years. Four => 10‐year follow‐up reports were consistent in showing that the earlier the subject is implanted the better the outcome. Many, but not all, of these children did obtain age‐appropriate language. There were 17 reports with follow‐up from 3 to less than 10 years. In 7 of the 11 studies, the children's expressive language was reported to have reached an age level of less than 80%. The results for receptive language showed that 4 of the 11 studies found that the children achieved a receptive language age level of less than 80%. There were 8 studies which documented the effect of implantation before 12 months of age and between 12 and 24 months of age and they all found that the earlier the implantation, the better the outcome for language.ConclusionThe cochlear implant is efficacious in the amelioration of receptive and expressive language deficits in most congenitally deafened children implanted before the age of one. The language outcomes for those implanted after the age of one decline as the age of implantation increases.Level of EvidenceN/A.

show abstract

“…This issue is gaining importance by the increasing placement of students with severe to profound hearing loss who are otherwise healthy in mainstream schools (Venail et al 2010) as cochlear implantation becomes widely accepted as a standard treatment over the last two decades (Kral & O'Donoghue 2010). The difficulties these children experience are well documented in the literature (e.g., Preisler et al 2005;van Wieringen & Wouters 2015).…”

Section: School-age Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Listening Effort Through Depth of Processing in School-Age Children

Hsu

Vanpoucke²,

Wieringen

2017

Ear &Amp; Hearing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: A reliable measure of listening effort is crucial for helping children with communication disorders. In this paper, we propose a novel behavioural paradigm designed to measure listening effort in school-age children and present the results of its validation in a group of normal-hearing children. The paradigm consists of a classic word recognition task in quiet and noise coupled to one of three categorization tasks requiring the children to judge either the color of two pictures or the meaning of the presented words. The response time from the categorization tasks is considered the primary indicator of listening effort. Design:The listening effort paradigm was evaluated in a group of 31 normal-hearing children 7 to 12 years of age without any history of language or developmental disorders. Custom software was developed to allow administration of the entire paradigm from a conventional laptop computer. A separate touch screen was used as a response interface to gather response time (RT) data from the children. All verbal responses were judged from an experienced tester in order to produce a word recognition score (WRS) for each condition. The software presented randomized lists of 146 selected Dutch nouns in one of three signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) to examine the potential effect of noise on both WRS and RT. Three distinct categorization tasks were also developed to examine how different depths of semantic processing would affect the two outcome measures of WRS and RT. It was hypothesized that, while listening effort as measured by RT would be affected by both noise level and the depth of semantic processing, WRS performance would be affected by changes in noise level only.Results: There was a significant effect of SNR level on school-age children's WRS: their word recognition performance tended to decrease with increasing background noise level. However, depth of processing did not appear to affect WRS. Moreover, a repeated-measure analysis of variance (rANOVA) fitted to transformed RT data revealed that this measure of listening effort in normal-hearing school-age children was significantly affected by both SNR level and the depth of semantic processing. There was no significant interaction between noise level and the type of categorization task with regard to RT. Conclusion:The patterns of WRS and RT as observed in our data sets provided support for our general hypothesis regarding the effects of background noise and semantic processing level on speech understanding and listening effort. Even though the magnitude of change in listening effort did not differ between the three novel categorization tasks, the exploratory nature of the current study warranted further evaluation of processing depths as a potential listening effort assessment paradigm in both normal-hearing and hearing-impaired populations.

show abstract

What can we expect of normally-developing children implanted at a young age with respect to their auditory, linguistic and cognitive skills?

Cited by 69 publications

References 77 publications

Predictors of pediatric cochlear implantation outcomes in South Africa

Predictors of pediatric cochlear implantation outcomes in South Africa

Language development in the pediatric cochlear implant patient

Listening Effort Through Depth of Processing in School-Age Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About