Audiology and Speech Pathology - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • 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
    Speech perception results for children using cochlear implants who have additional special needs
    Dettman, SJ ; Fiket, H ; Dowell, RC ; Charlton, M ; Williams, SS ; Tomov, AM ; Barker, EJ (ALEXANDER GRAHAM BELL ASSOC FOR THE DEAF, 2004)
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Components of a rehabilitation programme for young children using the Multichannel cochlear implant
    DETTMAN, S ; Barker, E ; Rance, G ; Dowell, R ; Galvin, K ; Sarant, J ; Cowan, R ; Skok, M ; Larratt, M ; Clark, G ; Allum, DJ (John Wiley & sons, Inc., 2006)
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Speech perception outcomes in older children who use multichannel cochlear implants: Older is not always poorer
    Dowell, RC ; Dettman, SJ ; Hill, K ; Winton, E ; Barker, EJ ; Clark, GM (SAGE Publications, 2002-01-01)
    Speech perception outcomes for early-deafened children who undergo implantation as teenagers or young adults are generally reported to be poorer than results for young children. It is important to provide appropriate expectations when counseling adolescents and their families to help them make an informed choice regarding cochlear implant surgery. The considerable variation of results in this group makes this process more difficult. This study considered a number of factors in a group of 25 children who underwent implantation in Melbourne between the ages of 8 and 18 years. Each subject completed open-set speech perception testing with Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentences before and after implantation and preoperative language testing with the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. Data were collected regarding the type of hearing loss, age at implantation, age at hearing aid fitting, audiometric details, and preoperative and postoperative communication mode. Results were submitted to a stepwise multiple linear regression analysis with postoperative open-set sentence scores as the dependent variables. The analysis suggested that 3 factors have a significant predictive value for speech perception after implantation: preoperative open-set sentence score, duration of profound hearing loss, and equivalent language age. These 3 factors accounted for 66% of the variance in this group. The results of this study suggest that children who have useful speech perception before implantation, and higher age-equivalent scores on language measures, would be expected to do well with a cochlear implant. Consistent with other studies, a shorter duration of profound hearing loss is also advantageous. The mean sentence score for this group, 47%, was not significantly different from the mean result across all children in the Melbourne program.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Speech perception in children using cochlear implants: prediction of long-term outcomes
    Dowell, RC ; Dettman, SJ ; Blamey, PJ ; Barker, EJ ; Clark, GM (Informa UK Limited, 2002-03)