Age at Intervention for Permanent Hearing Loss and 5-Year Language Outcomes

Ching, Teresa Y. C.; Dillon, Harvey; Button, Laura; Seeto, Mark; Buynder, Patricia Van; Marnane, Vivienne; Cupples, Linda; Leigh, Greg

doi:10.1542/peds.2016-4274

Cited by 202 publications

(134 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

124

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Australia has high‐quality universal infant hearing screening, which facilitates early diagnosis and enables early intervention, hearing device fitting and timely planning for cochlear implantation if indicated . Although the National Framework for Neonatal Hearing Screening provides guidance on infant screening, and early intervention pathways are well established, aetiological investigation and medical management of newly diagnosed infants have varied.…”

Section: Types Of Hearing Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood Hearing Australasian Medical Professionals network: Consensus guidelines on investigation and clinical management of childhood hearing loss

Sung

Downie

Paxton

et al. 2019

J Paediatrics Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Types Of Hearing Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood Hearing Australasian Medical Professionals network: Consensus guidelines on investigation and clinical management of childhood hearing loss

Sung

Downie

Paxton

et al. 2019

J Paediatrics Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Research findings show it is more likely that age‐appropriate language will be acquired with earlier age at implantation (e.g., Ching et al . , Colletti , Connor et al . , Nicholas and Geers ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…One predictive factor that has received much attention is age at implantation (e.g., Ching et al . , Geers et al . , Geers and Nicholas , Tomblin et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although some research investigating the impact of implantation under 12 months has shown an advantage for vocabulary and language outcomes (Ching et al . , Leigh et al . ), other research has not (e.g., Rinaldi et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One predictive factor that has received much attention is age at implantation (e.g., Ching et al 2017, Geers et al 2009, Geers and Nicholas 2013, Tomblin et al 2005. Research findings show it is more likely that age-appropriate language will be acquired with earlier age at implantation (e.g., Ching et al 2017, Colletti 2009, Connor et al 2006, Nicholas and Geers 2007. Overall, better outcomes have been reported when implantation occurs between the ages of 6 months and 2 years (e.g., Niparko et al 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Children with cochlear implants in infancy: predictors of early vocabulary

Bavin

Sarant

Leigh

et al. 2018

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pre-implant abilities are important in explaining some variability in the early vocabulary of infants with CIs, together with their use of early gestures post-implantation. That is, having a non-verbal means to express a concept can assist in their development of oral vocabulary. Identifying strategies to help develop fine motor skills for infants with CIs, and encouraging their use of gestures to communicate their needs/intentions, are likely to be of benefit.

show abstract

Identification of Potential Barriers to Timely Access to Pediatric Hearing Aids

Zhang

Links

Boss

et al. 2020

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE Despite various barriers identified to early pediatric access to cochlear implantation, barriers to timely access to pediatric hearing aids are not well characterized.OBJECTIVE To identify socioeconomic, demographic, and clinical factors that may be associated with pediatric access to hearing aids. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective cohort study included 90 patients aged 1 to 15 years who were referred for auditory brainstem response (ABR) testing and evaluation for hearing aids at a single tertiary care academic medical center from March 2004 to July 2018. Children who did not receive both ABR testing and hearing aids at the same center were excluded from analysis.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Associations of insurance type (private vs public), race/ethnicity (white vs other), primary language (English vs other), cause of hearing loss (complex vs not complex), zip code, hearing aid manufacturer, and severity of hearing loss (in decibels) with the duration of intervals from newborn hearing screening to ABR testing, from ABR testing to ordering of hearing aids, and from ABR testing to dispensing of hearing aids. RESULTSOf the 90 patients, mean (SD) age was 5.6 (3.7) years, 56% were female, and 77 (86%) were non-Hispanic. Results of χ 2 tests indicated significant assocations existed between public insurance and race/ethnicity and between public insurance and primary language other than English. Variables associated with the interval from newborn hearing screening to ABR testing included insurance type (mean difference, 7.4 months; 95% CI, 2.6-12.2 months) and race/ethnicity (mean difference, 6.9 months; 95% CI, 2.7-11.1 months). Increased delays between birth and a child's first ABR test were associated with public insurance (mean difference, 6.0 months; 95% CI, 1.8-10.2 months) and race/ethnicity other than white (mean difference, 6.0 months; 95% CI, 2.3-9.7 months). The mean time from birth to initial ABR testing was a mean of 6 months longer for patients from non-English-speaking families than for those from English-speaking families (mean [SD] interval, 14.9 [16.3] months vs 9.0 [8.5] months), although the difference was not statistically significant. Severity of hearing loss was associated with a decrease in the interval from ABR testing to ordering of hearing aids after accounting for other potential barriers (odds ratio, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9). Zip code and complexity of the child's medical condition did not appear to be associated with timely access to pediatric hearing aids.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study's findings suggest that insurance type, race/ethnicity, and primary language may be barriers associated with pediatric access to hearing aids, with the greatest difference observed in time to initial ABR testing. Clinical severity of hearing loss appeared to be associated with a significant decrease in time from ABR testing to ordering of hearing aids. Greater efforts to assist parents with ABR testing and coordination of follow-up may help improve access for other at-risk ch...

show abstract

Age at Intervention for Permanent Hearing Loss and 5-Year Language Outcomes

Abstract: Early intervention improves language outcomes, thereby lending support to streamlining clinical pathways to ensure early amplification and cochlear implantation after diagnosis.

Cited by 202 publications

References 29 publications

Childhood Hearing Australasian Medical Professionals network: Consensus guidelines on investigation and clinical management of childhood hearing loss

Childhood Hearing Australasian Medical Professionals network: Consensus guidelines on investigation and clinical management of childhood hearing loss

Children with cochlear implants in infancy: predictors of early vocabulary

Identification of Potential Barriers to Timely Access to Pediatric Hearing Aids

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About