Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcomes of Hearing Aid and Cochlear Implantation in Case of Congenital Non-Syndromic Bilateral Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss: An Observational Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study was done to measure the outcomes of hearing aid (HA) and cochlear implantation (CI) in case of congenital non syndromic severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) by using aided audiometry (AA), categories of auditory perception (CAP) score and speech intelligibility rating (SIR) scale. The objectives were to find out the effective management options available for bilateral severe to profound SNHL, to study the impact of age of CI on language development and to study the outcome of HA and CI. Patients with congenital severe to profound SNHL were included in the study. Initially the case history of the participants was taken then they underwent audiological tests to confirm hearing loss. To assess the outcomes of HA and CI, they were initially fitted with high gain digital behind the ear HA, then underwent auditory verbal therapy for twelve months, after that AA, CAP and SIR test done to measure the outcomes of HA and similar hierarchy followed for CI. The results showed that with HA, the benefit is very limited whereas with CI the benefit is significant. The average SIR score of HA and CI are 1 and 3.16 and average CAP score are 0.83 and 7.8 respectively. The study shows that the CI is one of the most effective management options available for severe to profound SNHL and found that early intervention followed by early detection of hearing loss helps in achieving better speech and language skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Davis A, Bamford J, Wilson I, Ramkalawan T, Forshaw M, Wright S (1997) A critical review of the role of neonatal hearing screening in the detection of congenital hearing impairment. Health Technol Assess 1(10):1–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Helfand M, Thompson DC, Davis R, McPhillips H, Homer CJ, Lieu TL (2001) Newborn hearing screening: systematic evidence review. AHRQ Publication No. 02-S001

  3. Harrison LJ, McLeod S (2010) Risk and protective factors associated with speech and language impairment in a nationally representative sample of 4 to 5-year-old children. J Speech, Lang Hear Res 53(2):508–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kumar S, Rout N, Kumar N, Chatterjee I, Selvakumaran H (2013) Performance of Indian children with cochlear implant on PEACH scale. ISRN Otolaryngol 2013:565096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Duchesne L, Bergeron F, Sutton A (2008) Language development in young children who received cochlear implants: A systematic review. Communicative Disorders Review 2(2):33–78

    Google Scholar 

  6. Reddy MV, HemaL B, Reddy PP, UshaP R (2006) Brief Report-Role of intrauterine Rubella infection in the causation of congenital deafness. Indian J Human Genet 12(3):140–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Manrique M, Cervera-Paz FJ, Huarte A, Molina M (2004) Advantages of cochlear implantation in prelingual deaf children before 2 years of age when compared with later implantation. The Laryngoscope 114(8):1462–1469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Geers AE, Nicholas JG, Moog JS (2007) Estimating the influence of cochlear implantation on language development in children. Audiol Med 5(4):262–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Osberger MJ, Maso M, Sam LK (1993) Speech intelligibility of children with cochlear implants, tactile aids, or hearing aids. J Speech Hear Res 36(1):186–203

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Geers AE, Nicholas JG, Sedey AL (2003) Language skills of children with early cochlear implantation. Ear Hear 24(1):46S–58S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Connor CM, Craig HK, Raudenbush SW, Heavner K, Zwolan TA (2006) The age at which young deaf children receive cochlear implants and their vocabulary and speech-production growth: is there an added value for early implantation? Ear Hear 27(6):628–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kane MO, Schopmeyer B, Mellon NK, Wang NY, Niparko JK (2004) Prelinguistic communication and subsequent language acquisition in children with cochlear implants. Arch Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg 130(5):619–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nicholas JG, Geers AE (2007) Will they catch up? The role of age at cochlear implantation in the spoken language development of children with severe to profound hearing loss. J Speech, Lang, Hear Res 50(4):1048–1062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nott P, Cowan R, Brown PM, Wigglesworth G (2003) Assessment of language skills in young children with profound hearing loss under two years of age. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 8(4):401–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Spencer PE (2004) Individual differences in language performance after cochlear implantation at one to three years of age: child, family, and linguistic factors. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 9(4):395–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tomblin JB, Barker BA, Spencer LJ, Zhang X, Gantz BJ (2005) The effect of age at cochlear implant initial stimulation on expressive language growth in infants and toddlers. J Speech, Lang, Hear Res 48(4):853–867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Robbins AM, Renshaw JJ, Berry SW (1991) Evaluating meaningful auditory integration in profoundly hearing-impaired children. The Am J Otol 12:144–150

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Coninx F, Weichbold V, Tsiakpini L, Autrique E, Bescond G, Tamas L, Compernol A, Georgescu M, Koroleva I, Le Maner-Idrissi G, Liang W (2009) Validation of the LittlEARS® Auditory questionnaire in children with normal hearing. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 73(12):1761–1768

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Archbold S, Lutman ME, Marshall DH (1995) Categories of auditory performance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 166:312–314

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (2007) Position statement: principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs. Pediatrics 120(4):898–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ching TY, Crowe K, Martin V, Day J, Mahler N, Youn S, Street L, Cook C, Orsini J (2010) Language development and everyday functioning of children with hearing loss assessed at 3 years of age. Int J Speech-Lang Pathol 12(2):124–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Geers AE, Moog JS, Biedenstein J, Brenner C, Hayes H (2009) Spoken language scores of children using cochlear implants compared to hearing age-mates at school entry. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 14(3):371–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ling D (1989) Foundations of spoken language for hearing impaired child. Alexander Graham Bell Association for the deaf. Inc, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  24. Neville HJ, Mills DL, Lawson DS (1992) Fractionating language: Different neural subsystems with different sensitive periods. Cereb Cortex 2(3):244–258

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ruben RJ (1997) A time frame of critical/sensitive periods of language development. Acta Otolaryngol 117(2):202–205

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Svirsky MA, Teoh SW, Neuburger H (2004) Development of language and speech perception in congenitally, profoundly deaf children as a function of age at cochlear implantation. Audiol Neurotol 9(4):224–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Novak MA, Firszt JB, Rotz LA, Hammes D, Reeder R, Willis M (2000) Cochlear implants in infants and toddlers. Ann Otol, Rhinol Laryngol 109(12):46–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Manrique MA, Cervera-Paz FJ, Huarte AL, Molina MA (2004) Prospective long-term auditory results of cochlear implantation in prelinguistically deafened children: the importance of early implantation. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 552:55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Liu M, Chen X, Rubin KH, Zheng S, Cui L, Li D, Chen H, Wang L (2005) Autonomy-vs. connectedness-oriented parenting behaviours in Chinese and Canadian mothers. Int J Behav Develop 29(6):489–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ang RP (2006) Effects of parenting style on personal and social variables for Asian adolescents. Am J Orthopsychiatry 76(4):503–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Boons T, Brokx JP, Dhooge I, Frijns JH, Peeraer L, Vermeulen A, Wouters J, Van Wieringen A (2012) Predictors of spoken language development following pediatric cochlear implantation. Ear Hear 33(5):617–639

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bachelor in Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Audiologist and Speech Language Pathologist, Department of ENT, Command Hospital Southern Command, Pune, India

    Lokanath Sahoo

  2. Bachelor in Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Hearing Zone, Bhubaneswar, India

    Krushnendu Sundar Sahoo

  3. Master in Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Pingalakhi Public Welfare Organisation, Puri, India

    Nitish Kumar Nayak

  4. Master in Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Clinical Audiologist, MAA ENT Hospital, Kolkata, India

    Anubhuti Behera

Authors
  1. Lokanath Sahoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Krushnendu Sundar Sahoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nitish Kumar Nayak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anubhuti Behera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lokanath Sahoo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sahoo, L., Sahoo, K.S., Nayak, N.K. et al. Outcomes of Hearing Aid and Cochlear Implantation in Case of Congenital Non-Syndromic Bilateral Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss: An Observational Study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 74 (Suppl 1), 200–206 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-020-01967-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-020-01967-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation