Audiology and Speech Pathology - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The narrow window: early cochlear implant use
    Dettman, SJD ; Leigh, JRL ; Dowell, RCD ; Pinder, DP ; Briggs, RJB ( 2007)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Communication development in children who receive the cochlear implant younger than 12 months: risks versus benefits.
    Dettman, SJ ; Pinder, D ; Briggs, RJS ; Dowell, RC ; Leigh, JR ( 2007-04)
    BACKGROUND: The advent of universal neonatal hearing screening in some countries and the availability of screening programs for at-risk infants in other countries has facilitated earlier referral, diagnosis, and intervention for infants with hearing loss. Improvements in device technology, two decades of pediatric clinical experience, a growing recognition of the efficacy of cochlear implants for young children, and the recent change in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's age criteria to include children as young as 12 mo has led to increasing numbers of young children receiving cochlear implants. Evidence to support provision for infants younger than 12 mo is extrapolated from physiological studies, studies of children using hearing aids, and studies of children older than 12 mo of age with implants. To date, however, there are few published research findings regarding communication development in children between 6 and 12 mo of age who receive implants. The current study hypothesized that earlier implantation would lead to increased rates of language acquisition as the children were still in the critical period for their development. METHOD: A retrospective review was completed for 19 infants (mean age at implantation, 0.88 yr; range, 0.61-1.07, SD 0.15) and 87 toddlers (mean age at implantation, 1.60 yr; range, 1.13-2.00, SD 0.24) who received the multichannel implant in Melbourne, Australia. Preimplantation audiological assessments for these children included aided and unaided audiograms, auditory brain stem response, auditory steady state response (ASSR), and otoacoustic emission and indicated profound to total bilateral hearing loss in all cases. Communication assessment included completion of the Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale and educational psychologists' cognitive and motor assessment. Computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, and surgical records for all cases were reviewed. Postimplantation language assessments were reported in terms of the rate of growth over time on the language comprehension and language expression subscales of the Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale. RESULTS: Results demonstrated that cochlear implantation may be performed safely in very young children with excellent language outcomes. The mean rates of receptive (1.12) and expressive (1.01) language growth for children receiving implants before the age of 12 mo were significantly greater than the rates achieved by children receiving implants between 12 and 24 mo, and matched growth rates achieved by normally hearing peers. These preliminary results support the provision of cochlear implants for children younger than 12 mo of age within experienced pediatric implantation centers.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Long term communication outcomes for children receiving cochlear implants younger than 12 months: A multi-centre study
    Dettman, S ; Dowell, R ; Choo, D ; Arnott,, W ; Abrahams, Y ; Davis, A ; Dornan, D ; Leigh, J ; Constantinescue, G ; Cowan, R ; Briggs, R (Wolters Kluwer, 2017)
    Objective: Examine the influence of age at implant on speech perception, language and speech production outcomes in a large unselected paediatric cohort. Study Design: This study pools available assessment data (collected prospectively and entered into respective databases from 1990 to 2014) from three Australian centres. Patients: Children (N=403) with congenital bilateral severe to profound hearing loss who received cochlear implants under 6 years of age (excluding those with acquired onset of profound hearing loss after 12 months, those with progressive hearing loss and those with mild/moderate/severe additional cognitive delay/disability). Main Outcome Measure(s): Speech Perception; open-set words (scored for words and phonemes correct) and sentence understanding at school entry and late primary school time points. Language; PLS and PPVT standard score equivalents at school entry, CELF standard scores. Speech Production; DEAP percentage accuracy of vowels, consonants, phonemes-total and clusters and percentage word-intelligibility at school entry. Results: Regression analysis indicated a significant effect for age-at-implant for all outcome measures. Cognitive skills also accounted for significant variance in all outcome measures except open-set phoneme scores. ANOVA with Tukey pairwise comparisons examined group differences for children implanted younger than 12 months (Group 1), between 13 and 18 months (Group 2), between 19 and 24 months (Group 3), between 25 and 42 months (Group 4), and between 43 to 72 months (Group 5). Open-set speech perception scores for Groups 1, 2 and 3 were significantly higher than Groups 4 and 5. Language standard scores for Group 1 were significantly higher than Groups 2, 3, 4 and 5. Speech production outcomes for Group 1 were significantly higher than scores obtained for Groups 2, 3, and 4 combined. Cross tabulation and Chi-square tests supported the hypothesis that a greater percentage of Group 1 children (than Groups 2, 3, 4, or 5) demonstrated language performance within the normative range by school entry. Conclusions: Results support provision of cochlear implants younger than 12 months of age for children with severe to profound hearing loss to optimise speech perception and subsequent language acquisition and speech production accuracy.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Bilateral cochlear implants in children
    Dowell, RC ; Galvin, KL ; Dettman, SJ ; Leigh, JR ; Hughes, KC ; Van Hoesel, R (Georg Thieme Verlag KG, 2011-02-28)