Cochlear implants and bacterial meningitis: a speech recognition study in paired samples
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
6
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2013
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
Fundação Otorrinolaringologia
Citação
INTERNATIONAL ARCHIVES OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, v.17, n.1, p.57-61, 2013
Resumo
INTRODUCTION: Cochlear implants may guarantee sound perception and the ability to detect speech at a close-to-normal hearing intensity; however, differences have been observed among implantees in terms of performance on discrimination tests and speech recognition. OBJECTIVE: To identify whether patients with post-meningitis deafness perform similarly to patients with hearing loss due to other causes. METHOD: A retrospective clinical study involving post-lingual patients who had been using Nucleus-22 or Nucleus-24 cochlear implants for at least 1 year. These patients were matched with respect to age (± 2 years), time since the onset of deafness (± 1 year), and the duration of implant use with implant users who had hearing loss due to other causes. Speech perception was assessed using the Portuguese version of the Latin-American Protocol for the Evaluation of Cochlear Implants. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 52 individuals (26 in each of the 2 groups). The post-meningitic group had a median of 18.5 active electrodes. The group with hearing loss due to other causes had a median of 21, but no significant statistical difference was observed (p = 0.07). The results of closed- and open-set speech recognition tests showed great variability in speech recognition between the studied groups. These differences were more pronounced for the most difficult listening tasks, such as the medial consonant task (in the vowel-consonant-vowel format). CONCLUSION: Cochlear implant recipients with hearing loss due to bacterial meningitis, who had been using the device for 1 year performed more poorly on closed- and open-set speech recognition tests than did implant recipients with hearing loss due to other causes.
Palavras-chave
Cochlear implants, Speech perception, Meningitis
Referências
- Bento RF, 2004, REV BRAS OTORRINOLAR, V70, P632, DOI 10.1590/S0034-72992004000500009
- Bevilacqua MC, 2003, Braz J Otorhinolaryngol, V69, P760
- Blamey P, 1996, Audiol Neurootol, V1, P293
- Douglas Susan A, 2008, Cochlear Implants Int, V9, P90, DOI 10.1002/cii.344
- El-Kashlan HK, 2003, OTOL NEUROTOL, V24, P596, DOI 10.1097/00129492-200307000-00011
- Eshraghi AA, 2004, OTOLARYNG HEAD NECK, V131, P885, DOI 10.1016/j.otohns.2004.05.019
- Fitzpatrick Elizabeth, 2006, BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord, V6, P7, DOI 10.1186/1472-6815-6-7
- Francis HW, 2004, ARCH OTOLARYNGOL, V130, P604, DOI 10.1001/archotol.130.5.604
- Francis HW, 2008, OTOL NEUROTOL, V29, P502, DOI 10.1097/MAO.0b013e318170b60b
- Goffi-Gomez MV, 2010, EUR ARCH OTO-RHINO-L, V267, P515, DOI 10.1007/s00405-009-1092-7
- Gomez MVSG, 2004, Arq Int Otorrinolaringol, V8, P303
- Grayeli AB, 2008, OTOL NEUROTOL, V29, P1140, DOI 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31818b6238
- Green JD, 1991, Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, V100, P712
- Guedes Mariana Cardoso, 2007, Braz J Otorhinolaryngol, V73, P439
- MacAndie C, 2000, Cochlear Implants Int, V1, P108, DOI 10.1002/cii.34
- Mosnier I, 2006, Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac, V123, P71, DOI 10.1016/S0003-438X(06)76645-2
- Nichani J, 2011, OTOL NEUROTOL, V32, P784, DOI 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31821677aa
- Philippon D, 2009, OTOL NEUROTOL, V31, P83
- Roukema BY, 2011, INT J OTOLARYNGOL, V2011, P845
- Sanna M, 2006, LARYNGOSCOPE, V116, P1700, DOI 10.1097/01.mlg.0000231739.79208.97
- Sridhar Divya, 2006, Audiol Neurootol, V11 Suppl 1, P16, DOI 10.1159/000095609
- STEENERSON RL, 1990, AM J OTOL, V11, P360
- Wellman MB, 2003, OTOL NEUROTOL, V24, P907, DOI 10.1097/00129492-200311000-00015