Graeme Clark Collection

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Speech perception results for children with implants with different levels of preoperative residual hearing
    Cowan, Robert S. C. ; DelDot, J. ; Barker, J. Z. ; Barker, Elizabeth J. ; Sarant, Julia Z. ; Pegg, P. ; Dettman, S. ; Galvin, K. L. ; Rance, G. ; Hollow, R. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Pyman, B. ; Gibson, W. P. R. ; Clark, Graeme, M. ( 1997)
    Objective: Many reports have established that hearing-impaired children using the Nucleus 22 channel cochlear implant may show both significant benefits to lipreading and significant scores on open-set words and sentences using electrical stimulation only. These findings have raised questions about whether severely or severely-to-profoundly deaf children should be candidates for cochlear implants. To study this question, postoperative results for implanted children with different levels of preoperative residual hearing were evaluated in terms of speech perception benefits. Study Design/Setting: A retrospective study of the first 117 children, sequentially, to undergo implantation in the Melbourne and Sydney Cochlear Implant Clinics was undertaken. All children had been assessed by and received their implants in a tertiary referral centre. Main Outcome Measures: To assess aided residual hearing, the children were grouped into four categories of hearing on the basis of their aided residual hearing thresholds measured preoperatively. To assess benefits, the scores of children on standard speech perception tests were reviewed. As different tests were used for children with different ages and language skills, children were grouped into categories according to the level of postoperative speech perception benefit. Results: The results showed that children in the higher categories of aided preoperative residual hearing showed significant scores on open-set word and sentence perception tests using the implant alone. For children in lower categories of aided residual hearing, results were variable within the groups. More than 90% of children with implants with aided residual hearing thresholds in the speech range above I kHz achieved open-set understanding of words and sentences. Conclusion: While the results of this preliminary study confirm previous findings of differential outcomes for children with different levels of preoperative residual hearing, they suggest that children with severe to profound hearing impairments should be considered for cochlear implantation.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Continuing improvements in speech processing for adult cochlear implant patients
    Hollow, R. D. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Cowan, R. S. C. ; Skok, M. C. ; Pyman, B. C. ; Clark, Graeme M. ( 1995)
    The Cochlear 22-channel cochlear implant has employed a succession of improved speech-processing strategies since its first use in an adult patient in Melbourne in 1982. 1 The first patients received the F0F2 coding strategy developed by the University of Melbourne, in the Wearable Speech Processor (WSP). The F0F2 coding scheme presented the implant user with three acoustic features of speech. These were 1) the amplitude of the waveform, presented as the amount of current charge, 2) fundamental frequency (F0) or voice pitch, presented as rate of biphasic pulsatile stimulation, and 3) the spectral range of the second formant frequency (F2), which was represented by varying the site of stimulation along the electrode array.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The progress of children using the multichannel cochlear implant in Melbourne
    Cowan, R. S. C. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Hollow, R. ; Dettman, S. J. ; Rance, G. ; Barker, E. J. ; Sarant, J. Z. ; Galvin, K. L. ; Webb, R. C. ; Pyman, B. C. ; Cousins, V. C. ; Clark, Graeme M. ( 1995)
    Multi-channel cochlear implantation in children began in Australia in 1985 and there are now close to 4000 profoundly deaf children and adolescents using the Australian implant system around the world. The aim of the implant procedure is to provide adequate hearing for speech and language development through auditory input. This contrasts with the situation for adults with acquired deafness where the cochlear implant aims to restore hearing for someone with well-developed auditory processing and language skills. As with adults, results vary over a wide range for children using the Multi-channel implant. Many factors have been suggested that may contribute to differences in speech perception for implanted children. In an attempt to better understand these factors, the speech perception results for children implanted in Melbourne were reviewed and subjected to statistical analysis. This has indicated that the amount of experience with the implant and the length of sensory deprivation are strongly correlated with perceptual results. This means that younger children are likely to perform better with an implant and that a number of years of experience are required for children to reach their full potential. The results have also indicated that educational placement and management play a crucial role in children reaching their potential. Overall, 60% of the children and adolescents in the study have reached a level of open-set speech understanding using the cochlear implant without lipreading.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Speech perception in children using the advanced Speak speech-processing strategy
    Cowan, R. S. C. ; Brown, C. ; Whitford, L. A. ; Galvin, K. L. ; Sarant, J. Z. ; Barker, E. J. ; Shaw, S. ; King, A. ; Skok, M. ; Seligman, P. M. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Everingham, C. ; Gibson, W. P. R. ; Clark, Graeme M. ( 1995)
    The Speak speech-processing strategy, developed by the University of Melbourne and commercialized by Cochlear Pty Limited for use in the new Spectra 22 speech processor, has been shown to provide improved speech perception for adults in both quiet and noisy situations. The present study evaluated the ability of children experienced in the use of the Multipeak (Mpeak) speech-processing strategy (implemented in the Nucleus Minisystem-22 cochlear implant) to adapt to and benefit from the advanced Speak speech-processing strategy (implemented in the Nucleus Spectra 22 speech processor). Twelve children were assessed using Mpeak and Speak over a period of 8 months. All of the children had over 1 year's previous experience with Mpeak, and all were able to score significantly on open-set word and sentence tests using the cochlear implant alone. Children were assessed with both live-voice and recorded speech materials, including Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant monosyllabic words and Speech Intelligibility Test sentences. Assessments were made in both quiet and in noise. Assessments were made at 3-week intervals to investigate the ability of the children to adapt to the new speech-processing strategy. For most of the children, a significant advantage was evident when using the Speak strategy as compared with Mpeak. For 4 of the children, there was no decrement in speech perception scores immediately following fitting with Speak. Eight of the children showed a small (10% to 20%) decrement in speech perception scores for between 3 and 6 weeks following the changeover to Speak. After 24 weeks' experience with Speak, 11 of the children had shown a steady increase in speech perception scores, with final Speak scores higher than for Mpeak. Only 1 child showed a significant decrement in speech perception with Speak, which did not recover to original Mpeak levels.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Cochlear implants in children, adolescents, and prelinguistically deafened adults: speech perception
    Dawson, Pam. W ; Blamey, Peter J. ; Rowland, Louise C. ; Dettman, Shani J. ; Clark, Graeme M. ; Busby, Peter A. ; Brown, Alison M. ; Dowell, Richard C. ; Rickards, Field W. ( 1992)
    A group of 10 children, adolescents, and prelinguistically deafened adults were implanted with the 22-electrode cochlear implant (Cochlear Pty Ltd) at the University of Melbourne Cochlear Implant Clinic and have used the prosthesis for periods from 12 to 65 months. Postoperative performance on the majority of closed-set speech perception tests was significantly greater than chance, and significantly better than preoperative performance for all of the patients. Five of the children have achieved substantial scores on open-set speech tests using hearing without lipreading. Phoneme scores in monosyllabic words ranged from 30% to 72%; word scores in sentences ranged from 26% to 74%. Four of these 5 children were implanted during preadolescence (aged 5:5 to 10:2 years) and the fifth, who had a progressive loss, was implanted during adolescence (aged 14:8 years). The duration of profound deafness before implantation varied from 2 to 8 years. Improvements were also noted over postoperative data collection times for the younger children. The remaining 5 patients who did not demonstrate open-set recognition were implanted after a longer duration of profound deafness (aged 13:11 to 20:1 years). The results are discussed with reference to variables that may affect implant performance, such as age at onset of loss, duration of profound loss, age at implantation, and duration of implantation. They are compared with results for similar groups of children using hearing aids and cochlear implants.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Factors predicting postoperative sentence scores in postlinguistically deaf adult cochlear implant patients
    Blamey, Peter J. ; Pyman, Brian C. ; Gordon, Michael ; Clark, Graeme M. ; Brown, Alison M. ; Dowell, Richard C. ; Hollow, Rodney D. ( 1992)
    A sample of 64 postlinguistically profoundly to totally deaf adult cochlear implant patients were tested without lipreading by means of the Central Institute for the Deaf (CID) sentence test 3 months postoperatively. Preoperative promontory stimulation results (thresholds, gap detection, and frequency discrimination), age, duration of profound deafness, cause of deafness, lipreading ability, postoperative intracochlear thresholds and dynamic ranges for electrical stimulation, depth of insertion of the electrode array into the scala tympani, and number of electrodes in use were considered as possible factors that might be related to the postoperative sentence scores. A multiple regression analysis with stepwise inclusion of independent variables Indicated that good gap detection and frequency discrimination during preoperative promontory testing, larger numbers of electrodes in use, and greater dynamic ranges for intracochlear electrical stimulation were associated with better CID scores. The CID scores tended to decrease with longer periods of profound deafness.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Cochlear implants in children, adolescents, and prelinguistically deafened adults: speech perception
    Dawson, Pam W. ; Blamey, Peter J. ; Rowland, Louise C. ; Dettman, Shani J. ; Clark, Graeme M. ; Busby, Peter A. ; Brown, Alison M. ; Dowell, Richard C. ; Rickards, Field W. ( 1992)
    A group of 10 children, adolescents, and prelinguistically deafened adults were implanted with the 22-electrode cochlear implant (Cochlear Ply Ltd) at the University of Melbourne Cochlear Implant Clinic and have used the prosthesis for periods from 12 to 65 months. Postoperative performance on the majority of closed-set speech perception tests was significantly greater than chance, and significantly better than preoperative performance for all of the patients. Five of the children have achieved substantial scores on open-set speech tests using hearing without lipreading. Phoneme scores in monosyllabic words ranged from 30% to 72%; word scores in sentences ranged from 26% to 74%. Four of these 5 children were implanted during preadolescence (aged 5:5 to 10:2 years) and the fifth, who had a progressive loss, was implanted during adolescence (aged 14:8 years). The duration of profound deafness before implantation varied from 2 to 8 years. Improvements were also noted over postoperative data collection times for the younger children. The remaining 5 patients who did not demonstrate open-set recognition were implanted after a longer duration of profound deafness (aged 13:11to 20:1 years). The results are discussed with reference to variables that may affect implant performance, such as age at onset of loss, duration of profound loss, age at implantation, and duration of implantation. They are compared with results for similar groups of children using hearing aids and cochlear implants.