Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Laryngoscope ; 134(4): 1868-1873, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37767794

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Determine variables that influence post-activation performance for cochlear implant (CI) recipients who lost low-frequency acoustic hearing. METHODS: A retrospective review evaluated CNC word recognition for adults with normal to moderately severe low-frequency hearing (preoperative unaided thresholds of ≤70 dB HL at 250 Hz) who were implanted between 2012 and 2021 at a tertiary academic center, lost functional acoustic hearing, and were fit with a CI-alone device. Performance scores were queried from the 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24-month post-activation visits. A linear mixed model evaluated the effects of age at implantation, array length (long vs. mid/short), and preoperative low-frequency hearing (normal to mild, moderate, and moderately severe) on speech recognition with a CI alone. RESULTS: 113 patients met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant main effect of interval (p < 0.001), indicating improved word recognition post-activation despite loss of residual hearing. There were significant main effects of age (p = 0.029) and array length (p = 0.038), with no effect of preoperative low-frequency hearing (p = 0.171). There was a significant 2-way interaction between age and array length (p = 0.018), indicating that older adults with mid/short arrays performed more poorly than younger adults with long lateral wall arrays when functional acoustic hearing was lost. CONCLUSION: CI recipients with preoperative functional low-frequency hearing experience a significant improvement in speech recognition with a CI alone as compared to preoperative performance-despite the loss of low-frequency hearing. Age and electrode array length may play a role in post-activation performance. These data have implications for the preoperative counseling and device selection for hearing preservation candidates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 134:1868-1873, 2024.


Assuntos
Implante Coclear , Implantes Cocleares , Percepção da Fala , Humanos , Idoso , Percepção da Fala/fisiologia , Audição , Testes Auditivos , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Laryngoscope ; 2024 Apr 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38656740

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Research samples that are representative of patient populations are needed to ensure the generalizability of study findings. The primary aim was to assess the efficacy of a study design and recruitment strategy in obtaining a participant sample that was representative of the broader cochlear implant (CI) patient population at the CI center. A secondary aim was to review whether the CI recipient population was representative of the state population. METHODS: Demographic variables were compared for a research participant sample (n = 79) and the CI patient population (n = 338). The participant sample was recruited from the CI patient population. The study design included visits that were at the same location and frequency as the recommended clinical follow-up intervals. The demographics for the combined group (participant sample and patient population) were then compared to the reported demographics for the population in North Carolina. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the participant sample and patient population for biological sex, age at implantation, racial distribution, socioeconomic position, degree of urbanization, or drive time to the CI center (p ≥ 0.086). The combined CI recipient population was significantly different from the North Carolina population for the distributions of race, ethnicity, and degree of urbanization (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The study design and recruitment strategy allowed for recruitment of a participant sample that was representative of the CI patient population. Disparities in access to cochlear implantation persist, as supported by the significant differences in the combined CI recipient population and the population for our state. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 2024.

3.
Otol Neurotol ; 44(10): 1004-1010, 2023 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37758328

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the incidence of electrode contacts within the functional acoustic hearing region in cochlear implant (CI) recipients and to assess its influence on speech recognition for electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) users. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: One hundred five CI recipients with functional acoustic hearing preservation (≤80 dB HL at 250 Hz). INTERVENTIONS: Cochlear implantation with a 24-, 28-, or 31.5-mm lateral wall electrode array. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Angular insertion depth (AID) of individual contacts was determined from imaging. Unaided acoustic thresholds and AID were used to calculate the proximity of contacts to the functional acoustic hearing region. The association between proximity values and speech recognition in quiet and noise for EAS users at 6 months postactivation was reviewed. RESULTS: Sixty percent of cases had one or more contacts within the functional acoustic hearing region. Proximity was not significantly associated with speech recognition in quiet. Better performance in noise was observed for cases with close correspondence between the most apical contact and the upper edge of residual hearing, with poorer results for increasing proximity values in either the basal or apical direction ( r14 = 0.48, p = 0.043; r18 = -0.41, p = 0.045, respectively). CONCLUSION: There was a high incidence of electrode contacts within the functional acoustic hearing region, which is not accounted for with default mapping procedures. The variability in outcomes across EAS users with default maps may be due in part to electric-on-acoustic interference, electric frequency-to-place mismatch, and/or failure to stimulate regions intermediate between the most apical electrode contact and the functional acoustic hearing region.


Assuntos
Implante Coclear , Implantes Cocleares , Percepção da Fala , Humanos , Implantes Cocleares/efeitos adversos , Implante Coclear/métodos , Estimulação Acústica/métodos , Percepção da Fala/fisiologia , Incidência , Audição , Estimulação Elétrica/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA