scholarly journals Speech perception in noise and quality of life after Cochlear Implantation in asymmetric hearing loss or single sided deafness

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
W Großmann ◽  
F Müller ◽  
R Mlynski
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Speech Perception In Noise ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Asymmetric Hearing Loss

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

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 259-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret T. Dillon ◽  
Emily Buss ◽  
Meredith A. Rooth ◽  
English R. King ◽  
Ellen J. Deres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Behavioral Measures ◽  
Speech Perception In Noise ◽  
Contralateral Ear

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.

scholarly journals Cochlear Implantation and Other Treatments in Single-Sided Deafness and Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Results of a National Multicenter Study Including a Randomized Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Mathieu Marx ◽  
Isabelle Mosnier ◽  
Frederic Venail ◽  
Michel Mondain ◽  
Alain Uziel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Asymmetric Hearing Loss ◽  
Severe Tinnitus

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Cochlear implantation is a recent approach proposed to treat single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). Several cohort studies showed its effectiveness on tinnitus and variable results on binaural hearing. The main objective of this study is to assess the outcomes of cochlear implantation and other treatment options in SSD/AHL on quality of life. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This prospective multicenter study was conducted in 7 tertiary university hospitals and included an observational cohort study of SSD/AHL adult patients treated using contralateral routing of the signal (CROS) hearing aids or bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHSs) or who declined all treatments, and a randomized controlled trial in subjects treated by cochlear implantation, after failure of CROS and BAHS trials. In total, 155 subjects with SSD or AHL, with or without associated tinnitus, were enrolled. After 2 consecutive trials with CROS hearing aids and BAHSs on headband, all subjects chose any of the 4 treatment options (abstention, CROS, BAHS, or cochlear implant [CI]). The subjects who opted for a CI were randomized between 2 arms (CI vs. initial observation). Six months after the treatment choice, quality of life was assessed using both generic (EuroQoL-5D, EQ-5D) and auditory-specific quality-of-life indices (Nijmegen Cochlear implant Questionnaire [NCIQ] and Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] for tinnitus severity). Performances for speech-in-noise recognition and localization were measured as secondary outcomes. <b><i>Results:</i></b> CROS was chosen by 75 subjects, while 51 opted for cochlear implantation, 18 for BAHSs, and 11 for abstention. Six months after treatment, both EQ-5D VAS and auditory-specific quality-of-life indices were significantly better in the “CI” arm versus “observation” arm. The mean effect of the CI was particularly significant in subjects with associated severe tinnitus (mean improvement of 20.7 points ± 19.7 on EQ-5D VAS, 20.4 ± 12.4 on NCIQ, and 51.4 ± 35.4 on tinnitus). No significant effect of the CI was found on binaural hearing results. Before/after comparisons showed that the CROS and BAHS also improved significantly NCIQ scores (for CROS: +7.7, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = [4.5; 10.8]; for the BAHS: +14.3, 95% CI = [7.9; 20.7]). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Cochlear implantation leads to significant improvements in quality of life in SSD and AHL patients, particularly in subjects with associated severe tinnitus, who are thereby the best candidates to an extension of CI indications.

scholarly journals Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness: A New Treatment Paradigm

2019 ◽  
Vol 80 (02) ◽  
pp. 178-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Zeitler ◽  
Michael Dorman
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Pediatric Population ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Music Appreciation ◽  
Speech Understanding In Noise ◽  
Treatment Paradigm ◽  
New Treatment ◽  
Single Sided Deafness

AbstractUnilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), also known as single sided deafness (SSD), is a problem that affects both children and adults, and can have severe and detrimental effects on multiple aspects of life including music appreciation, speech understanding in noise, speech and language acquisition, performance in the classroom and/or the workplace, and quality of life. Additionally, the loss of binaural hearing in SSD patients affects those processes that rely on two functional ears including sound localization, binaural squelch and summation, and the head shadow effect. Over the last decade, there has been increasing interest in cochlear implantation for SSD to restore binaural hearing. Early data are promising that cochlear implantation for SSD can help to restore binaural functionality, improve quality of life, and may faciliate reversal of neuroplasticity related to auditory deprivation in the pediatric population. Additionally, this new patient population has allowed researchers the opportunity to investigate the age-old question “what does a cochlear implant (CI) sound like?.”

scholarly journals Subjective Benefits of Bimodal Listening in Cochlear Implant Recipients with Asymmetric Hearing Loss

2020 ◽  
Vol 162 (6) ◽  
pp. 933-941 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Thompson ◽  
Margaret T. Dillon ◽  
Emily Buss ◽  
Meredith A. Rooth ◽  
English R. King ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Sentence Recognition ◽  
Academic Center ◽  
Asymmetric Hearing Loss

Objective To investigate the influence of cochlear implant (CI) use on subjective benefits in quality of life in cases of asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). Study Design Prospective clinical trial. Setting Tertiary academic center. Subjects and Methods Subjects included CI recipients with AHL (n = 20), defined as moderate-to-profound hearing loss in the affected ear and mild-to-moderate hearing loss in the contralateral ear. Quality of life was assessed with the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) pragmatic subscales, which assess binaural benefits. Subjective benefit on the pragmatic subscales was compared to word recognition in quiet and spatial hearing abilities (ie, masked sentence recognition and localization). Results Subjects demonstrated an early, significant improvement ( P < .01) in abilities with the CI as compared to preoperative abilities on the SSQ pragmatic subscales by the 1-month interval. Perceived abilities were either maintained or continued to improve over the study period. There were no significant correlations between results on the Speech in Quiet subscale and word recognition in quiet, the Speech in Speech Contexts subscale and masked sentence recognition, or the Localization subscale and sound field localization. Conclusions CI recipients with AHL report a significant improvement in quality of life as measured by the SSQ pragmatic subscales over preoperative abilities. Reported improvements are observed as early as 1 month postactivation, which likely reflect the binaural benefits of listening with bimodal stimulation (CI and contralateral hearing aid). The SSQ pragmatic subscales may provide a more in-depth insight into CI recipient experience as compared to behavioral sound field measures alone.

Cochlear implantation in adults with single-sided deafness: generic and disease-specific long-term quality of life

2019 ◽  
Vol 277 (3) ◽  
pp. 695-704 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franz Muigg ◽  
Harald R. Bliem ◽  
Heike Kühn ◽  
Josef Seebacher ◽  
Bernhard Holzner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Disease Specific

scholarly journals Cochlear Implants in Single-Sided Deafness. Comparison Between Children and Adult Populations With Post-lingually Acquired Severe to Profound Hearing Loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Falcón Benítez ◽  
Juan Carlos Falcón González ◽  
Ángel Ramos Macías ◽  
Silvia Borkoski Barreiro ◽  
Ángel Ramos de Miguel
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Speech Test ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Common Etiology ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Positive Results ◽  
Auditory Lateralization

Objective: To determine audiological and clinical results of cochlear implantation (CI) comparing two populations with single-sided deafness (SSD): post-lingually deaf children between 6 and 12 years of age, and post-lingually deaf adults, in order to evaluate the effect of CI in different age groups.Design: Retrospective case review.Setting: Tertiary clinic.Patients and Method: Twenty-three children and twenty-one adult patients that were candidates for CI with single-side deafness were included. In all cases we evaluate: Speech perception thresholds; disyllabic words test (65 dB SPL) were performed in the modalities S0–SCI–SNH and Auditory Lateralization Test. The Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) questionnaire was also used. All results were obtained after 12 months of CI activation.Results: In children, the most common etiology was idiopathic sensory-neural hearing loss. They showed positive results in the Auditory Lateralization Test. In the Speech Test, word recognition in noise improved from 2% preoperatively to 61.1% at a mean follow-up of 1 year (S0 condition) in children [test with signal in CI side 60% and signal normal hearing side (plugged) 31%]. The processor was used for &gt;12 h in all cases. With respect to the SSQ questionnaire, parents were more satisfied within the postoperative period than within the preoperative period. For adults, the most common etiology was idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Positive results in the Auditory Lateralization Test were found. With respect to the Speech Test in quiet conditions: Word recognition in noise improved from 5.7% preoperatively to 71.8% at a mean follow-up of 1 year [test with signal in CI side 68% and signal normal hearing side (plugged) 41%]. The processor was used for &gt;12 h. In the SSQ questionnaire, the post-operative results showed a beneficial effect of the CI. No adverse events were reported during the study period. No differences were found between children and adults in all tests in this study.Conclusions: Cochlear implantation in post-lingually deaf adults and children with SSD can achieve a speech perception outcome comparable with CI in conventional candidates. Improvements in spatial hearing were also observed. Careful patient selection and counseling regarding potential benefits are important to optimize outcomes.

scholarly journals COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION PREVALENCE IN ELDERLY

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-128
Author(s):  
A. V. Starokha ◽  
A. V. Balakina ◽  
M. M. Litvak ◽  
A. E. Knipenberg ◽  
N. V. Shcherbik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Weighted Sums ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Role Functioning ◽  
Sf 36

Current paper describes an experience of cochlear implantation in elderly. Cochlear implantation has become a widely accepted intervention in the treatment of individuals with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. Cochlear implants are now accepted as a standard of care to optimize hearing and subsequent speech development in children and adults with deafness. But cochlear implantation affects not only hearing abilities, speech perception and speech production; it also has an outstanding impact on the social life, activities and self-esteem of each patient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cochlear implantation efficacy in elderly with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. There were 5 patients under our observation. Surgery was performed according to traditional posterior tympanotomy and cochleostomy for cochlear implant electrode insertion for all observed patients. The study was conducted in two stages: before speech processor’s activation and 3 months later. Pure tone free field audiometry was performed to each patient to assess the efficiency of cochlear implantation in dynamics. The aim of the study was also to evaluate quality of life in elderly with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss after unilateral cochlear implantation. Each patient underwent questioning with 36 Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). SF-36 is a set of generic, coherent, and easily administered quality-of-life measures. The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The eight sections are: physical functioning; physical role functioning; emotional role functioning; vitality; emotional well-being; social role functioning; bodily pain; general health perceptions. Our results demonstrate that cochlear implantation in elderly consistently improved quality of life and enhance the efficiency of audiologic rehabilitation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document