Graeme Clark Collection
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemIntroduction: International Cochlear Implant, Speech and Hearing Symposium - Melbourne 1994( 1995)The International Cochlear Implant Speech and Hearing Symposium - Melbourne 1994 covered a wide range of presentations in a number of disciplines. The scientific program included 287 oral presentations and 40 posters, presented to a total of 456 delegates from 38 countries. This was a considerable expansion in the number and range of presentations from the first international conference held in Melbourne in 1985 (Ann Otol Rhinal Laryngal 1987;96[suppl 128]). This growth highlights the importance of the discipline and the advances being made in this area.
-
ItemPreoperative residual hearing as a predictor of postoperative speech scores for adult cochlear implant users [Abstract]( 1994)The development of multiple channel cochlear implants has been a significant advance in the rehabilitation of profound hearing loss. Speech perception benefits have been particularly evident for postlinguistically deafened adults, who as a group have shown not only supplementation of lipreading scores but also significant comprehension of words and sentences using an implant alone, without the aid of lipreading. In many cases, patients are able to use their implant for telephone conversation. Speech perception benefits for adult users have increased with advances in speech processing and improved means of habilitation. These improvements in open-set speech benefits for adult users have resulted in a steady increase in group mean scores and a reevaluation of selection criteria for cochlear implantation. In the initial development of cochlear implants, only those with little or no residual hearing were considered as candidates. Current selection criteria now include those with substantial residual hearing, who may score up to 40% in the best-aided condition on word and sentence speech perception tests. In order to provide realistic expectations for prospective cochlear implant patients, it is important to establish the relationship of many preimplant factors to postimplant speech perception benefits. For severely hearing impaired adults, the relationship between preoperative residual hearing, as measured by aided word and sentence speech perception test scores, and postoperative speech perception benefits is of significant interest. Analysis of data collected over a 15 year period for adult patients is presented. The rationale for conducting full speech perception assessments for all potential cochlear implant patients is stressed.
-
ItemA clinical report on vocabulary skills in cochlear implant users [Abstract]( 1994)Receptive vocabulary results are reported for 32 children, adolescents and prelinguistically deafened adults implanted with the 22-electrode cochlear implant at the Melbourne Cochlear Implant Clinic. Age at implantation ranged from 2 years, 6 months to 20 years and implant use ranged from 1 year to 7 years, 8 months. There were significant gains from pre- to postoperative assessments on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) for the majority of subjects. Rates of improvement found are compatible with previous reports on smaller numbers of implant users, but cannot be attributable unambiguously to use of the implant. The group postoperative performance was significantly higher than mean preoperative performance (n =25). The relationship of variables such as duration of implant use, duration of profound deafness and speech perception ability to improvement on the PPVT is discussed. Expressive vocabulary results on the Renfrew Word Finding Vocabulary Scale are reported for 11 of the subjects. Less substantial gains were made on this measure.
-
ItemA clinical report on speech production of cochlear implant users [Abstract]( 1994)Speech production results are reported for a group of 15 children, adolescents and prelinguistically deafened adults implanted with the 22-electrode cochlear implant. Age at implantation ranged from 5 years to 20 years and implant experience ranged from 1 year to 4 years, 7 months. On a speech intelligibility test using sentences seven implant users improved significantly over time. Mean group performance (n = 11) improved from 18% preoperatively to 43% postoperatively. Similarly on a test of articulation, eight implant users improved significantly over time and the group mean postoperative performance (n = 11) exceeded the preoperative performance (55% compared to 38%). This group effect was significant for consonants and blends but was nonsignificant for vowels. Improvements occurred for front, middle and back consonants, for stops, nasals, fricatives and glides and for voiceless and voiced consonants. Three implant users showed no significant gain on either test. The results suggest complex relationships between speech production performance and sensory information provided by a multichannel implant.
-
ItemResults for children and adolescents using the multichannel cochlear prosthesis [Abstract]( 1992)The first adolescent to use the 22-electrode cochlear prosthesis was Implanted In Melbourne in 1985 and the first child (less than 10 years), the following year. Since then, over 100 children have received the cochlear prosthesis in Australia and over 1200 worldwide. Detailed assessment of 200 children in the U.S.A., Australia and Germany lead to the market approval of the prosthesis by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in July 1990. The analysis of results for these children has proven to be difficult due to the use of different tests in different places, the lack of appropriate assessment tools for young children, the wide range of performance, and the problems of cooperation for young children. Despite these problems, some trends are beginning to emerge in the speech perception results for implanted children. Children with a greater amount of auditory experience before becoming profoundly deaf tend to perform better, as do children with more experience with the cochlear prosthesis. Those with a greater number of electrodes in use also perform better, a result supported by adult studies. Although older prelinguistically deafened children do not perform as well as postlinguistically deafened adults, there appears to be little difference between results for pre-and post-linguistically deafened young children. These trends In speech perception results will be discussed in more detail.