Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Technological and Rehabilitative Concerns: Perspectives of Cochlear Implant Recipients Who Are Musicians.
Gfeller, Kate; Veltman, Joke; Mandara, Robert; Napoli, Mary Beth; Smith, Sarah; Choi, Yoon; McCormick, Gaelen; McKenzie, Tim; Nastase, Anamaria.
Affiliation
  • Gfeller K; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 4083The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
  • Veltman J; Behavioural Science Institute, 6029Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Mandara R; EURO-CIU, Tervakoski, Finland.
  • Napoli MB; Independent Scholars, Plattsburgh, NY, USA.
  • Smith S; Auditory Implant Service, 7423University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
  • Choi Y; Independent Scholars, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
  • McCormick G; 101663Eastman School of Music, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
  • McKenzie T; Independent Scholars, Bristol, VT, USA.
  • Nastase A; Independent Scholars, Bucharest, Romania.
Trends Hear ; 26: 23312165221122605, 2022.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36203400
ABSTRACT
In these perspectives, we share the experiences of eight cochlear implant (CI) recipients who are musicians, and their efforts within and outside of audiological appointments to achieve satisfying music experiences. Their experiences were previously shared in a panel discussion as part of the 3rd Music and Cochlear Implant Symposium hosted at The University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. Following the symposium, the panel members and moderator developed and completed a follow-up questionnaire to facilitate a formal analysis of the following questions (a) What forms of support for optimizing music exist within clinical CI appointments, including counseling, mapping, assessment, and rehabilitation? (b) What forms of support do CI users who are interested in music desire? (c) What self-initiated approaches can be used to improve music perception, enjoyment, and participation? Using qualitative methodology, the questionnaire data were coded, aggregated into themes, and then into core categories. The primary themes that emerged from the data were (a) limited levels of support for optimizing music outcomes within normal clinical appointments, (b) difficulties in current mapping and assessment in relation to music perception, and (c) limited availability of clinically sponsored training/rehabilitation for music. These CI recipients then recommended clinical protocol changes and described self-initiated rehabilitation. These findings were examined in relation to literature on clinical practices for CI users, auditory rehabilitation, and patient-centered care, emphasizing best practices and barriers to audiological care. The data as related to healthcare trends were conceptualized and developed into a proposed Reciprocal Model for Music Rehabilitation (RMMR).
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Cochlear Implants / Cochlear Implantation / Music Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Trends Hear Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Publication country: EEUU / ESTADOS UNIDOS / ESTADOS UNIDOS DA AMERICA / EUA / UNITED STATES / UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / US / USA

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Cochlear Implants / Cochlear Implantation / Music Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Trends Hear Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Publication country: EEUU / ESTADOS UNIDOS / ESTADOS UNIDOS DA AMERICA / EUA / UNITED STATES / UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / US / USA