Graeme Clark Collection
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemSpeech perception in implanted children: influence of preoperative residual hearing on outcomes [Abstract]( 1998)Since the first child was implanted with the Nucleus 22-channel prosthesis in Melbourne in 1985, several thousand children world-wide have now benefitted from this technology. More effective paediatric assessment and management procedures have now been developed, allowing cochlear implants to be offered to children under the age of 2 years. Improvements in speech processing strategy have also been implemented in the Nucleus implant system, resulting in increased mean speech perception benefits for implanted adults. Although a range of performance on formal measures of hearing, speech or language has been reported for children using implants, results from the first decade of implant experience consistently show that significant benefits are available to children receiving their implant at an early age. Reported speech perception results for implanted children show that a considerable proportion (60%) of paediatric patients in the Melbourne and Sydney clinics are able to understand some open-set speech using electrical stimulation alone. These results, and the upward trend of mean speech perception benefits shown for postlinguistically deafened adults have raised questions as to whether severely, or severely-to-profoundly deaf children currently using hearing aids would in fact benefit more from a cochlear implant. To investigate the potential influence of the degree of preoperative residual hearing on postoperative speech perception, results for all implanted children in the Melbourne and Sydney cochlear implant programs were analysed. Results showed that as a group, children with higher levels of preoperative residual hearing were consistently more likely to achieve open-set speech perception benefits. Potential factors in this finding could be higher levels of ganglion cell survival or greater patterning of the auditory pathways using conventional hearing aids prior to implantation. Conversely, children with the least preoperative residual hearing were less predictable, with some children achieving open-set perception, and others showing more limited closed-set benefits to perception. For these children, it is likely that preoperative residual hearing is of less significance than other factors in outcomes.
-
ItemSpeech perception for children with different levels of residual hearing using the cochlear 22-channel cochlear prosthesis [Abstract[( 1996)Over the past 10 years, since the implantation of the first children with the Nucleus 22-channel cochlear prosthesis in Melbourne, the number of profoundly deaf children using this implant system has rapidly expanded. Longer-term experience with implanted children has led to improvements in paediatric assessment and management. Speech processing strategies have also been improved, resulting in a series of increases in speech perception benefits. Results of comparative studies of Speak and Multipeak speech processing strategies have shown that open-set word and sentence scores for a group of thirteen children evaluated over a two year period showed an advantage with the Speak speech processing strategy. The increases were noted particularly in speech perception in poor signal-to-noise conditions. Analysis has shown that consonant perception was significantly increased, due to an improved place perception. Given current speech perception scores for implanted children, it has been suggested that severely-to-profoundly deaf children currently using hearing aids could in fact benefit more from a cochlear implant. Preliminary investigation of results for children in the Melbourne and Sydney cochlear implant programs has shown that children with higher levels of preoperative residual hearing as a group do score significantly on open-set word and sentence perception tests using the implant alone. In children with lower levels of residual hearing, results were variable across the group.
-
ItemIssues in long-term management of children with cochlear implants and tactile devices [Abstract]( 1994)For many children with severe and profound hearing losses, conventional hearing aids are unable to provide sufficient amplification to ensure good oral communication and/or in the case of very young children, development of speech and language. Traditionally a number of these children have opted for the use of sign language alone or in Total Communication approaches as a primary means of communication. The advent of multiple channel cochlear implants for children and the continuing development of multiple channel speech processing tactile devices provide auditory approaches to resolving communication difficulties for these children. The successful use of such devices depends on a number of factors including the information provided through the aid; the ease of use, convenience and reliability of the aid; the individual communication needs of the child; and the habilitation and management program used with the device. Long-term data has shown that children continue to show increased speech perception benefits from improvements in speech processing and from further experience with these devices. Habilitation and management programs must therefore be geared to meet the changing needs of children as they progress and of families as children mature and face new challenges. Habilitation must address specific individual needs in speech perception and in speech production. For very young children, benefits of improved speech perception should have an impact on the development of speech and language, and habilitation and management must emphasise the need for language growth.
-
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.
-
ItemSpeech perception results in children using the 22-electrode cochlear implant [Abstract]( 1990)Twenty-one profoundly hearing impaired children ranging in age from 3 to 20 years have been implanted with the 22-electrode cochlear implant (Cochlear Pty ltd) at the University of Melbourne Cochlear Implant Clinic. Five children (aged 6.0 to 14.8 years) 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 five children were implanted during preadolescence and the fifth who had a progressive loss, was implanted during adolescence. Eight children (aged 3.0 to 11 years), have either been implanted recently or are too young for detailed assessments. However some have shown using closed set speech perception tests or vowel imitation tasks, that they are beginning to use the auditory input provided by the implant. The remaining children (aged 13.11 to 20.1 years) have not demonstrated open set recognition but are all full time users of the device. This group was implanted during adolescence after a long duration of profound deafness. The results will be discussed with reference to a number of variables which may contribute to successful implant use; such as age of onset of deafness, duration of deafness. age of implantation, educational program and type of training.