Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Ear and Hearingarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Ear and Hearing
Article . 2018 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY NC ND
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Outcomes in Children

Authors: Kevin D. Brown; Holly F. B. Teagle; Jennifer Woodard; Lisa R Park; Erika B. Gagnon;

Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Outcomes in Children

Abstract

Objectives: This study investigates outcomes in children fit with electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) and addresses three main questions: (1) Are outcomes with EAS superior to outcomes with conventional electric-only stimulation in children? (2) Do children with residual hearing benefit from EAS and conventional electric-only stimulation when compared with the preoperative hearing aid (HA) condition? (3) Can children with residual hearing derive benefit from EAS after several years of listening with conventional electric-only stimulation? Design: Sixteen pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients between 4 and 16 years of age with an unaided low-frequency pure tone average of 75 dB HL in the implanted ear were included in two study arms. Arm 1 included new recipients, and Arm 2 included children with at least 1 year of CI experience. Using a within-subject design, participants were evaluated unilaterally with the Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word list in quiet and the Baby Bio at a +5 dB SNR using an EAS program and a conventional full electric (FE) program. Arm 1 participants’ scores were also compared with preoperative scores. Results: Speech perception outcomes were statistically higher with the EAS program than the FE program. For new recipients, scores were significantly higher with EAS than preoperative HA scores for both the CNC and Baby Bio in noise; however, after 6 months of device use, results in the FE condition were not significantly better than preoperative scores. Long-term FE users benefited from EAS over their FE programs based on CNC word scores. Conclusions: Whether newly implanted or long-term CI users, children with residual hearing after CI surgery can benefit from EAS. Cochlear implantation with EAS fitting is a viable option for children with HAs who have residual hearing but have insufficient access to high-frequency sounds and poor speech perception.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Male, Adolescent, Hearing Loss, Sensorineural, Cochlear Implantation, Electric Stimulation, Hearing Aids, Acoustic Stimulation, Child, Preschool, Speech Perception, Audiometry, Pure-Tone, Humans, Female, Child

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    21
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
21
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
hybrid