Indication criteria for cochlear implants and hearing aids: impact of audiological and non-audiological findings

Owing to technological progress and a growing body of clinical experience, indication criteria for cochlear implants (CI) are being extended to less severe hearing impairments. It is, therefore, worth reconsidering these indication criteria by introducing novel testing procedures. The diagnostic evidence collected will be evaluated. The investigation includes postlingually deafened adults seeking a CI. Prior to surgery, speech perception tests [Freiburg Speech Test and Oldenburg sentence (OLSA) test] were performed unaided and aided using the Oldenburg Master Hearing Aid (MHA) system. Linguistic skills were assessed with the visual Text Reception Threshold (TRT) test, and general state of health, socio-economic status (SES) and subjective hearing were evaluated through questionnaires. After surgery, the speech tests were repeated aided with a CI. To date, 97 complete data sets are available for evaluation. Statistical analyses showed significant correlations between postsurgical speech reception threshold (SRT) measured with the adaptive OLSA test and pre-surgical data such as the TRT test (r=−0.29), SES (r=−0.22) and (if available) aided SRT (r=0.53). The results suggest that new measures and setups such as the TRT test, SES and speech perception with the MHA provide valuable extra information regarding indication for CI.

[1]  Francis Kuk,et al.  Evaluation of five different cochlear implant designs: Audiologic assessment and predictors of performance , 1988, The Laryngoscope.

[2]  Monika Bullinger,et al.  SF-36, Fragebogen zum Gesundheitszustand , 1998 .

[3]  Giso Grimm,et al.  The master hearing Aid : A PC-based platform for algorithm development and evaluation , 2006 .

[4]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA Noises: Artificial Noise Signals with Speech-like Spectral and Temporal Properties for Hearing Instrument Assessment: Ruidos ICRA: Señates de ruido artificial con espectro similar al habla y propiedades temporales para pruebas de instrumentos auditivos , 2001 .

[5]  G Keidser,et al.  NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. , 2001, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[6]  Blake S Wilson,et al.  Cochlear implants: current designs and future possibilities. , 2008, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[7]  W. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. , 2001, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[8]  Jürgen Kießling,et al.  Versorgung und Rehabilitation mit Hörgeräten , 2008 .

[9]  J. Stockman.  Spoken Language Development in Children Following Cochlear Implantation , 2012 .

[10]  S. Staller,et al.  Speech perception abilities of adult and pediatric Nucleus implant recipients using the Spectral Peak (SPEAK) coding strategy. , 1997, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[11]  Michael K. Qin,et al.  Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Andreas Büchner,et al.  Speech Perception with Cochlear Implants as Measured Using a Roving-Level Adaptive Test Method , 2010, ORL.

[14]  L H Mens,et al.  Predictors of cochlear implant performance. , 1999, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[15]  H. Gustafsson,et al.  Masking of speech by amplitude-modulated noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  T Lenarz,et al.  Factors influencing cochlear implant perceptual performance in 132 adults. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[17]  D J Orchik,et al.  Speech recognition ability as a function of duration of deafness in multichannel cochlear implant patients , 1990, The Laryngoscope.

[18]  D. Goodin.  The cambridge dictionary of statistics , 1999 .

[19]  G. Andersson,et al.  Psychometric evaluation of the Gothenburg Profile for measurement of experienced hearing disability and handicap: applications with new hearing aid candidates and experienced hearing aid users. , 1998, British journal of audiology.

[20]  B C Moore,et al.  Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting: II. Hearing aids with multi-channel compression. , 1999, British journal of audiology.

[21]  K. D. Zylan,et al.  Article , 1996, Physiology & Behavior.

[22]  E Lehnhardt,et al.  Prognostic factors in 187 adults provided with the Nucleus cochlear mini-system 22. , 1993, Advances in oto-rhino-laryngology.

[23]  Karl-Heinz Hahlbrock,et al.  Über Sprachaudiometrie und neue Wörterteste , 2005, Archiv für Ohren-, Nasen- und Kehlkopfheilkunde.

[24]  G. Franke.  Monika Bullinger und Inge Kirchberger "SF-36. Fragebogen zum Gesundheitszustand. Handanweisung." , 1998 .

[25]  David Shipp,et al.  Speech Coding Strategies and Revised Cochlear Implant Candidacy: An Analysis of Post-Implant Performance , 2003, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[26]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  Performance Groups in Adult Cochlear Implant Users: Speech Perception Results From 1984 Until Today , 2008, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[27]  Tammo Houtgast,et al.  The development of the text reception threshold test: a visual analogue of the speech reception threshold test. , 2007, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[28]  Emily A Tobey,et al.  Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. , 2010, JAMA.

[29]  L. J. Anthony,et al.  The Cambridge Dictionary of Statistics (2nd ed.) , 2003 .

[30]  W D Baumgartner,et al.  [Speech discrimination in post-lingually deaf patients with cochlear implants]. , 2000, Wiener klinische Wochenschrift.

[31]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  The role of silent intervals for sentence intelligibility in fluctuating noise in hearing-impaired listeners , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[32]  J. Niparko,et al.  Choice of Ear for Cochlear Implantation: The Effect of History and Residual Hearing on Predicted Postoperative Performance , 2003, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[33]  John K Niparko,et al.  Predictive models for cochlear implantation in elderly candidates. , 2005, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.