Sequential bilateral cochlear implantation (Zhang et al., 2020)

School closures and other COVID-19-related restrictions could decrease children's exposure to speech during important stages of development. To assess whether significant decreases in exposure to spoken communication found during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic among children using cochlear implants are confirmed for a larger cohort of children and were sustained over the first years of the COVID-19 pandemic. This cohort study used datalogs collected from children with cochlear implants during clinical visits to a tertiary pediatric hospital in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, from January 1, 2018, to November 11, 2021. Children with severe to profound hearing loss using cochlear implants were studied because their devices monitored and cataloged levels and types of sounds during hourly use per day (datalogs) and because their hearing and spoken language development was particularly vulnerable to reduced sound exposure. Statistical analyses were conducted between January 2022 and August 2023. Daily hours of sound were captured by the cochlear implant datalogging system and categorized into 6 auditory scene categories, including speech and speech-in-noise. Time exposed to speech was calculated as the sum of daily hours in speech and daily hours in speech-in-noise. Residual hearing in the ear without an implant of children with unilateral cochlear implants was measured by pure tone audiometry. Mixed-model regression analyses revealed main effects with post hoc adjustment of 95% CIs using the Satterthwaite method. Datalogs (n = 2746) from 262 children (137 with simultaneous bilateral cochlear implants [74 boys (54.0%); mean (SD) age, 5.8 (3.5 years)], 38 with sequential bilateral cochlear implants [24 boys (63.2%); mean (SD) age, 9.1 (4.2) years], and 87 with unilateral cochlear implants [40 boys (46.0%); mean (SD) age, 7.9 (4.6) years]) who were preschool aged (n = 103) and school aged (n = 159) before the COVID-19 pandemic were included in analyses. There was a slight increase in use among preschool-aged bilateral cochlear implant users through the pandemic (early pandemic, 1.4 h/d [95% CI, 0.3-2.5 h/d]; late pandemic, 2.3 h/d [95% CI, 0.6-4.0 h/d]) and little change in use among school-aged bilateral cochlear implant users (early pandemic, -0.6 h/d [95% CI, -1.1 to -0.05 h/d]; late pandemic, -0.3 h/d [95% CI, -0.9 to 0.4 h/d]). However, use decreased during the late pandemic period among school-aged children with unilateral cochlear implants (-1.8 h/d [95% CI,-3.0 to -0.6 h/d]), particularly among children with good residual hearing in the ear without an implant. Prior to the pandemic, children were exposed to speech for approximately 50% of the time they used their cochlear implants (preschool-aged children: bilateral cochlear implants, 46.6% [95% CI, 46.5%-47.2%] and unilateral cochlear implants, 52.1% [95% CI, 50.7%-53.5%]; school-aged children: bilateral cochlear implants, 47.6% [95% CI, 46.8%-48.4%] and unilateral cochlear implants, 51.0% [95% CI, 49.4%-52.6%]). School-aged children in both groups experienced significantly decreased speech exposure in the early pandemic period (bilateral cochlear implants, -12.1% [-14.6% to -9.4%]; unilateral cochlear implants, -15.5% [-20.4% to -10.7%]) and late pandemic periods (bilateral cochlear implants, -5.3% [-8.0% to -2.6%]; unilateral cochlear implants, -11.2% [-15.3% to -7.1%]) compared with the prepandemic baseline. This cohort study using datalogs from children using cochlear implants suggests that a sustained reduction in children's access to spoken communication was found during more than 2 years of COVID-19 pandemic-related lockdowns and school closures.

A cochlear implant (CI) is a hearing device introduced in the 1980s for profoundly deaf subjects who gained little or no benefit from powerful hearing aids. This device comprises an electrode array inserted in the cochlea, connected to an internal receiver, and an externally worn speech processor. The CI transforms acoustic signals into electrical currents which directly stimulate the auditory nerve. Since the early 1990s, cochlear implantation in children has been developing rapidly. Although it is still difficult to predict how a child will perform with a cochlear implant, the success of cochlear implantation can no longer be denied. In this paper, some recent papers and reports, and the results of the various Nijmegen cochlear implant studies, are reviewed. Issues about selection, examinations, surgery and the outcome are discussed. Overall, our results were comparable with those of other authors. It can be concluded that cochlear implantation is an effective treatment for postlingually deaf as well as prelingually (congenital or acquired) deaf children with profound bilateral sensorineural deafness.

There is substantial variability in speech recognition ability across patients with cochlear implants (CIs), auditory brainstem implants (ABIs), and auditory midbrain implants (AMIs). To better understand how this variability is related to central processing differences, the current electroencephalography (EEG) study compared hearing abilities and auditory-cortex activation in patients with electrical stimulation at different sites of the auditory pathway. Three different groups of patients with auditory implants (Hannover Medical School; ABI: n = 6, CI: n = 6; AMI: n = 2) performed a speeded response task and a speech recognition test with auditory, visual, and audio-visual stimuli. Behavioral performance and cortical processing of auditory and audio-visual stimuli were compared between groups. ABI and AMI patients showed prolonged response times on auditory and audio-visual stimuli compared with NH listeners and CI patients. This was confirmed by prolonged N1 latencies and reduced N1 amplitudes in ABI and AMI patients. However, patients with central auditory implants showed a remarkable gain in performance when visual and auditory input was combined, in both speech and non-speech conditions, which was reflected by a strong visual modulation of auditory-cortex activation in these individuals. In sum, the results suggest that the behavioral improvement for audio-visual conditions in central auditory implant patients is based on enhanced audio-visual interactions in the auditory cortex. Their findings may provide important implications for the optimization of electrical stimulation and rehabilitation strategies in patients with central auditory prostheses. Hum Brain Mapp 38:2206-2225, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Determine the impact of cochlear implantation on quality of life (QOL) and determine the correlation between QOL and speech recognition ability. Two authors independently searched PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature to identify studies reporting hearing-specific or cochlear implant (CI)-specific QOL outcomes before and after cochlear implantation, and studies reporting correlations between QOL and speech recognition after cochlear implantation. Data from the included articles were obtained independently by two authors. Standardized mean difference (SMD) for each measure and pooled effects were determined to assess improvement in QOL before and after cochlear implantation. From 14 articles with 679 CI patients who met the inclusion criteria, pooled analyses of all hearing-specific QOL measures revealed a very strong improvement in QOL after cochlear implantation (SMD = 1.77). Subset analysis of CI-specific QOL measures also showed very strong improvement (SMD = 1.69). Thirteen articles with 715 patients met the criteria to evaluate associations between QOL and speech recognition. Pooled analyses showed a low positive correlation between hearing-specific QOL and word recognition in quiet (r = 0.213), sentence recognition in quiet (r = 0.241), and sentence recognition in noise (r = 0.238). Subset analysis of CI-specific QOL showed similarly low positive correlations with word recognition in quiet (r = 0.213), word recognition in noise (r = 0.241), and sentence recognition in noise (r = 0.255). Using hearing-specific and CI-specific measures of QOL, patients report significantly improved QOL after cochlear implantation. However, widely used clinical measures of speech recognition are poor predictors of patient-reported QOL with CIs. Laryngoscope, 128:982-990, 2018.

To evaluate the quality of life after cochlear implantation in adult cochlear implant recipients and to assess the applicability of Nijmegen Cochlear implant Questionnaire (NCIQ). Thirty-two postlingually deaf patients, 19 males and 13 females, underwent cochlear implantation with the age at operation of 35.27 (18-66) during the period from 1996 to the end of 2006. NCIQ was used to investigate the application of the equipment, hearing ability, and emotional exchange ability. All of the patients used their cochlear implants for 16 h every day on average with an experience in using such implant of more than 6 months. Improvement was seen in sound recognition, speech recognition, confidence, daily life, social exchange, and emotional behavior ability at different degrees. The improvement of confidence was very obvious. The speech communication ability of those with a hearing deprivation time longer than 5 years was lower than that of those with a shorter hearing deprivation time. Age and educational level did not influence the efficiency. Cochlear implantation is a cost effective intervention in the postlingually deaf adults. NCIQ test can be used to evaluate the quality of life among postlingually deaf adult cochlear implant recipients in China.

Previous research in cochlear implant (CI) recipients with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss showed improvements in speech recognition in noise using remote wireless microphone systems. However, to our knowledge, no previous studies have addressed the benefit of these systems in CI recipients with single-sided deafness. The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential improvement in speech recognition in noise for distant speakers in single-sided deaf (SSD) CI recipients obtained using the digital remote wireless microphone system, Roger. In addition, we evaluated the potential benefit in normal hearing (NH) participants gained by applying this system. Speech recognition in noise for a distant speaker in different conditions with and without Roger was evaluated with a two-way repeated-measures design in each group, SSD CI recipients, and NH participants. Post hoc analyses were conducted using pairwise comparison t-tests with Bonferroni correction. Eleven adult SSD participants aided with CIs and eleven adult NH participants were included in this study. All participants were assessed in 15 test conditions (5 listening conditions × 3 noise levels) each. The listening conditions for SSD CI recipients included the following: (I) only NH ear and CI turned off, (II) NH ear and CI (turned on), (III) NH ear and CI with Roger 14, (IV) NH ear with Roger Focus and CI, and (V) NH ear with Roger Focus and CI with Roger 14. For the NH participants, five corresponding listening conditions were chosen: (I) only better ear and weaker ear masked, (II) both ears, (III) better ear and weaker ear with Roger Focus, (IV) better ear with Roger Focus and weaker ear, and (V) both ears with Roger Focus. The speech level was fixed at 65 dB(A) at 1 meter from the speech-presenting loudspeaker, yielding a speech level of 56.5 dB(A) at the recipient's head. Noise levels were 55, 65, and 75 dB(A). Digitally altered noise recorded in school classrooms was used as competing noise. Speech recognition was measured in percent correct using the Oldenburg sentence test. In SSD CI recipients, a significant improvement in speech recognition was found for all listening conditions with Roger (III, IV, and V) versus all no-Roger conditions (I and II) at the higher noise levels (65 and 75 dB[A]). NH participants significantly benefited from the application of Roger in noise for higher levels, too. In both groups, no significant difference was detected between any of the different listening conditions at 55 dB(A) competing noise. There was also no significant difference between any of the Roger conditions III, IV, and V across all noise levels. The application of the advanced remote wireless microphone system, Roger, in SSD CI recipients provided significant benefits in speech recognition for distant speakers at higher noise levels. In NH participants, the application of Roger also produced a significant benefit in speech recognition in noise.

School adjustment of adolescents with sequential bilateral cochlear implants in mainstream school.

Interest of vestibular evaluation in sequentially implanted children: Preliminary results

Objectives To investigate the effects of a number of variables on phoneme discrimination (PD) performance in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants (SeqBiCIs) and compare PD performance between the 2 implantation sides and between children with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) and their age-matched peers with normal hearing (NH). Design All participants completed the Auditory Speech Sound Evaluation Phoneme Discrimination Test. Study sample The sample included 23 children with SeqBiCIs as the study group and 23 with NH as the control group. Results A significant difference was found between the scores of the two groups under the CI1 and CI2 conditions (p = 0.001), CI1 and BiCI conditions (p = 0.002), and CI2 and BiCI conditions (p = 0.001). PD scores with CI1 significantly depend on age at CI1 and duration of bilateral use. PD scores with CI1 were significant predictors of PD performance with CI2. Duration of BiCI use was a significant predictor of PD scores with BiCI. Conclusions The age at CI1 and the duration of bilateral cochlear implant use were found to improve phoneme discrimination performance in children with a sequential bilateral cochlear implant. According to the success of the CI1, it is possible to predict the success of CI2 use.

To evaluate the listening conditions of bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users in their daily living environment. Retrospective study. University hospital. Thirty-one adult CI users 16 years or older; 18 underwent sequential surgery, and 13 underwent simultaneous surgery. Inclusion criteria included the availability of CI data logging features and a minimum duration of binaural use of 6 months. Retrospective analysis of data obtained from the automatic scene classifier data logging system. Comparison of data logging and maximum speech discrimination scores of the two surgery groups (sequential vs. simultaneous) to investigate the potential influence of these factors on the listening conditions of CI users. The maximum speech discrimination score of the second CI in the sequential group was significantly worse than that of any other CI in the sequential and simultaneous CI groups. Additionally, the longer the interval between surgeries, the more significant the difference in "time on air" between the first and the second CIs. The second CI in sequential CI surgery had a shorter "time on air" than the first or the bilateral simultaneous CIs; the second CI was also used more frequently in noisy and speech with background noise environments. A second CI may be more frequently used in challenging listening environments because of its binaural auditory effect, despite its lower speech discrimination performance. The timing of sequential implantation and the potential impact of binaural hearing should be considered when developing rehabilitation strategies for individuals with bilateral CIs.

There is currently a unique opportunity to examine the experiences of young people who receive a second sequential cochlear implant (SCI), after only having had 1 cochlear implant (CI) for most of their lives. Eleven young people who had opted to receive an SCI were interviewed. Interpretative phenomenological analysis resulted in the identification of 6 master themes. Most participants enjoyed improved confidence and social well-being following their SCI and felt that 2 CIs were superior to 1. The majority identified themselves as hearing and deaf, but not culturally Deaf, as they strived to live in the hearing world. However, this was not without challenges and many young people experienced feelings of difference in the hearing world. These findings have clinical implications in terms of the role of clinical psychologists and other mental health professionals in CI clinics and in providing information to families making decisions about CIs. These findings add to the emergent deaf identity development literature in young people with CIs.

The aim of our study is to compare the outcomes in unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants in pediatric age and also between simultaneous and sequential cochlear implant surgery. This retrospective study was carried out with 83 children aged between 12months to 2.5years which included 41 children with bilateral Cochlear implants and 42 with unilateral implants. Out of these 41 children, 21 were simultaneous and 20 were sequential cochlear implant. All the children were operated at civil hospital Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India. CAP, SIR, localization, traffic noise and speech in noise scores were assessed at regular intervals over the period of 4years. Also the drug administration time, surgical time, operating room time were assessed for simultaneous and sequential cochlear implant surgery. Children with bilateral simultaneous implants fared significantly better with CAP, SIR, localization, speech noise and traffic noise scores than sequential bilateral implants and unilateral implants with a significant difference of means t tests between the two groups. Simultaneous cochlear implant surgery is associated with reduced surgical time, operating room time, it shortens the total in patient stay. There is less of drug administration and bilateral ones are stimulated simultaneously. Bilateral cochlear implants perform better with respect to auditory perception skills and spontaneous speech when compared with unilateral implants, but simultaneous surgery is better and safe option for pediatric cochlear implantation.

Intervention for a Child with Auditory Neuropathy/Dys-synchrony

Determine associations expected and actual cochlear implant (CI) outcomes, decisional regret, and satisfaction in experienced adult CI users. Cross-sectional cohort study. Tertiary medical center. Thirty-nine adult CI users meeting traditional bilateral hearing loss indications with ≥12 months CI experience. Patients completed the validated Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Living and Decisional Regret instruments. Pre- and post-CI outcomes (CI Quality of Life [CIQOL]-Expectations; CIQOL-35 Profile; CNC words, AzBio Sentences) were obtained from a prospectively maintained clinical database. Using established cutoff scores, 29% of patients reported a substantial degree of post-CI decisional regret. For each CIQOL domain, patients without decisional regret obtained post-CI outcome scores closer to pre-CI expectations compared with patients with decisional regret ( d = 0.34 to 0.91); similar results were observed with higher CI user satisfaction ( d = 0.17-0.83). Notably, the degree of pre- to post-CI improvement in CNC or AzBio scores did not differ between patients with and without decisional regret or with lower and higher satisfaction. Finally, greater pre-/postimprovement in CIQOL-35 Profile domain scores demonstrated far stronger associations with lower decisional regret and higher satisfaction than changes in speech recognition scores. Patients with better alignment of their pre-CI expectations and post-CI outcomes and greater pre-/post-CIQOL improvement had lower decisional regret and higher satisfaction. This emphasizes the importance of evidence-based pre-CI counseling regarding real-world CI benefits and caution against assuming that improvements in speech recognition are related to patient satisfaction.

To quantify the effect of datalogging on speech recognition scores and time to achievement for a "benchmark" level of performance within the first year, and to provide a data-driven recommendation for minimum daily cochlear implant (CI) device usage to better guide patient counseling and future outcomes. Retrospective cohort. Tertiary referral center. Three hundred thirty-seven adult CI patients with data logging and speech recognition outcome data who were implanted between August 2015 and August 2020. Processor datalogging, speech recognition scores, achievement of "benchmark speech recognition performance" defined as 80% of the median score for speech recognition outcomes at our institution. The 1-month datalogging measure correlated positively with word and sentences scores at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postactivation. Compared with age, sex, and preoperative performance, datalogging was the largest predictive factor of benchmark achievement on multivariate analysis. Each hour/day increase of device usage at 1 month resulted in a higher likelihood of achieving benchmark consonant-nucleus-consonant and AzBio scores within the first year (odds ratio = 1.21, p < 0.001) as well as earlier benchmark achievement. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified the optimal data logging threshold at an average of 12 hours/day. Early CI device usage, as measured by 1-month datalogging, predicts benchmark speech recognition achievement in adults. Datalogging is an important predictor of CI performance within the first year postimplantation. These data support the recommended daily CI processor utilization of at least 12 hours/day to achieve optimal speech recognition performance for most patients.