Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:32:50.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multi-channel cochlear implantation in patients with a post-traumatic sensorineural hearing loss

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

A. Moore  and
I. M. Cheshire
A. Moore*
Affiliation:
Midland Cochlear Implant Programme, Department of Otolaryngology, University Hospital Birmingham, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
I. M. Cheshire
Affiliation:
Midland Cochlear Implant Programme, Department of Otolaryngology, University Hospital Birmingham, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
*
Miss Alison Moore, Specialist Speech and Language Therapist, Hearing Assessment and Rehabilitation Centre, Selly Oak Hospital, Raddlebarn Road, Selly Oak, Birmingham, West Midlands B29 6JD.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There are few accounts of cochlear implantation in adults with post-traumatic sensorineural hearing loss. We report our experience with multichannel implantation in three such patients.

Two patients experienced no cognitive or communication deficits as a result of their head injury. At nine months post-implant, compared with our experience of non-head-injured implantees, these patients achieved average or above average scores on audiological performance tests.

The third patient presented with cognitive, behavioural and communicative deficits. The level of improvement achieved by this patient, when lip-reading was supplemented with electrical stimulation, in both BKB sentence and connected discourse tracking (CDT) tests was comparable with that of the non-head-injured group. However, his absolute performance at nine months post-implant was well below average. Performance at 18 months on BKB sentences and environmental sound recognition showed little change, and was again well below average, however his score on CDT with lip-reading and electrical stimulation improved considerably and was similar to the average achieved by the non-head-injured group. The major difficulties experienced with this patient were increasing depression and low implant use. Considerably more time was spent in the assessment and rehabilitation of this patient and involved liaison with a number of other agencies. When considering such patients for cochlear implantation it is strongly recommended that these additional requirements are taken into account.

Keywords

Hearing loss, sensorineuralHead injuriesCochlear implants
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 113 , Supplement 24 , August 1999 , pp. 34 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bird, A. S., MacDonald, A. J. D., Mann, A. H., Philpot, M. P. (1987) Preliminary experience with the SELFCARE(D): a self-rating depression questionnaire for use in elderly non-institutionalized subjects. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 2: 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coligado, E. J., Wiet, R. J., O'Connor, C. A., Ito, V., Sahgal, V. (1993) Multichannel cochlear implantation in the rehabilitation of post-traumatic sensorineural hearing loss. Archives of Physic Medicine and Rehabilitation 74: 653–657.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Summerfield, A. Q., Marshall, D. (1995) Cochlear Implantation in the UK 1990–1994. Report by the MRC Institute of Hearing Research on the Evaluation of the National Cochlear Implant Programme. Main report. HMSO.Google Scholar