Hearing preservation and speech perception outcomes with electric‐acoustic stimulation after 12 months of listening experience

Adunka, Oliver F.; Dillon, Margaret T.; Adunka, Marcia C.; King, English R.; Pillsbury, Harold C.; Buchman, Craig A.

doi:10.1002/lary.23741

Cited by 60 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Initial preservation of residual hearing after cochlear implantation can be achieved to varying degrees in 50% to 100% of cases (Lenarz et al 2013; Adunka et al 2013; Huarte & Roland 2014; Usami et al 2014; Gstoettner et al 2009). When residual hearing is preserved, patients may utilize both electric and acoustic hearing in the implanted ear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Delayed post-implantation hearing loss has been reported in 15 to 56% of patients with initially preserved hearing (Gifford et al 2013; Reiss, Turner, Karsten, Erenberg, Taylor & Gantz 2012b; Van Abel et al 2015; Lenarz et al 2013; Adunka et al 2013). In the Hybrid 10 clinical trial, for example, although only 2 out of 87 patients were found to have total hearing loss at the initial one month follow up, an additional 6 patients progressed to total hearing loss between 3 and 24 months after implantation(Gantz et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Delayed loss of hearing after hearing preservation cochlear implantation: Human temporal bone pathology and implications for etiology

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delayed loss of hearing after hearing preservation cochlear implantation: Human temporal bone pathology and implications for etiology

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The EAS and conventional CI cohorts participated in separate, prospective studies [Adunka et al, 2013;Buchman et al, 2014] that included the assessment of quality of life with the APHAB during the 1st year of device use. Demographic information for the UHL cohort is described in the Methods of Experiment I.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life in Adults with Unilateral Hearing Loss

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Patients with moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in 1 ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear, known as unilateral hearing loss (UHL) or single-sided deafness (SSD), may experience improved quality of life with the use of a cochlear implant (CI) in the affected ear. Quality of life assessment before and after implantation may reveal changes to aspects of hearing beyond those explicitly evaluated with behavioral measures. Methods: The present report completed 2 experiments investigating quality of life outcomes in CI recipients with UHL. The first experiment assessed quality of life during the 1st year of device use with 3 questionnaires: the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), and the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory. Twenty subjects were evaluated preoperatively and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-activation. Quality of life results were compared over the study period using traditional scoring methods and the SSQ pragmatic subscales. Subscales specific to localization and speech perception in noise were compared to behavioral measures at the preoperative and 12-month intervals. The 2nd experiment evaluated quality of life preoperatively and at the 12-month interval for CI recipients with UHL and CI recipients with bilateral hearing loss, including conventional CI users and those listening with electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS). The 3 cohorts differed in CI candidacy criteria, including the amount of residual hearing in the contralateral ear. Results: For subjects with moderate-to-profound UHL, receipt of a CI significantly improved quality of life, with benefits noted as early as 1 month after initial activation. The UHL cohort reported less perceived difficulty at the pre- and postoperative intervals than the conventional CI and EAS cohorts, which may be due to the presence of the normal-hearing ear. Each group experienced a significant benefit in quality of life on the APHAB with CI use. Conclusions: Cochlear implantation in cases of substantial UHL may offer significant improvements in quality of life. Quality of life measures revealed a reduction in perceived tinnitus severity and subjective improvements in speech perception in noise, spatial hearing, and listening effort. While self-report of difficulties were lower for the UHL cohort than the conventional CI and EAS cohorts, subjects in all 3 groups reported an improvement in quality of life with CI use.

show abstract

“…It is assumed that the additional use of drugs such as glucocorticoids during and after implantation stabilize hearing preservation (9). The EAS is now a well-established and efficacious treatment, characterized by increased speech recognition in noise, improved sound quality of music, and more natural hearing (10,11). Because of the improved methods for preservation of the residual hearing, more patients become candidates for EAS surgery (12).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Vibro-EAS

Schraven¹,

Mlynski

Dalhoff

et al. 2015

Otology &Amp; Neurotology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Hearing preservation and speech perception outcomes with electric‐acoustic stimulation after 12 months of listening experience

Abstract: 4.

Cited by 60 publications

References 21 publications

Delayed loss of hearing after hearing preservation cochlear implantation: Human temporal bone pathology and implications for etiology

Delayed loss of hearing after hearing preservation cochlear implantation: Human temporal bone pathology and implications for etiology

Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life in Adults with Unilateral Hearing Loss

Vibro-EAS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About