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/ Audiology and Neurot...arrow_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/
Audiology and Neurotology
Article . 2017 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY NC ND
Data sources: Crossref
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/
Audiology and Neurotology
Article
License: CC BY NC ND
Data sources: UnpayWall
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.

Late Cochlear Implantation in Early-Deafened Adults: A Detailed Analysis of Auditory and Self-Perceived Benefits

Authors: Joke, Debruyne; Miranda, Janssen; Jan, Brokx;

Late Cochlear Implantation in Early-Deafened Adults: A Detailed Analysis of Auditory and Self-Perceived Benefits

Abstract

<b><i>Objectives:</i></b> It is known that early-deafened cochlear implant (CI) users are a very heterogeneously performing group. To gain more insight into this population, this study investigated (1) postoperative changes in auditory performance over time based on various outcome measures, focusing on poor performers, (2) self-perceived outcomes, (3) relations between auditory and self-perceived outcomes, and (4) preimplantation factors predicting postoperative outcomes. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Outcomes were assessed prospectively in a group of 27 early-deafened, late-implanted CI users, up to 3 years after implantation. Outcome measures included open-set word and sentence recognition, closed-set word recognition, speech tracking and a questionnaire on self-perceived outcomes. Additionally, the relative influence of 8 preimplantation factors on CI outcome was assessed with linear regression analyses. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Significant improvements were found for auditory performance measures and most of the questionnaire domains. Significant changes of the closed-set word test, speech tracking and questionnaire were also found for a subgroup of poor performers. Correlations between auditory and self-perceived outcomes were weak and nonsignificant. Preoperative word recognition and preoperative hearing thresholds, both for the implanted ear, were significant predictors of postoperative outcome in the multivariable regression model, explaining 63.5% of the variation. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Outcome measurement in this population should be adjusted to the patients’ individual performance level and include self-perceived benefit. There is still a need for more knowledge regarding predictors of CI outcomes in this group, but the current study suggests the importance of the preoperative performance of the ear to be implanted.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    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).
    15
    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).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
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!
15
Top 10%
Top 10%
Average
hybrid