Abstract
Cochlear implant device programming is a skill that develops with training and experience. For children, the audiologist relies on many aspects of professional training, including diagnostic skill and intuition, knowledge of the anatomy and physiology of hearing, psychophysical measurements, electrophysiological measures, speech acoustics, normal child development, and all facets and features of hearing technologies. With substantial diversity among recipients, the audiologist learns how various aspects of the child and their social and educational environments affect outcomes. The unique characteristics of each individual should be considered and appreciated to obtain the best outcome. A team approach to patient management, including partnering with parents, before and after cochlear implantation is critical. The process of creating speech processor programs requires knowledge of cochlear implant software and hardware that must be continually updated. This chapter reviews the use of behavioral and objective measures, consideration of the various speech processor program parameters, and how to optimize device settings for young cochlear implant recipients.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
American Academy of Audiology. (2012). Audiologic Guidelines for the Assessment of Hearing in Infants and Young Children. http://www.audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/Documents/201208_AudGuideAssessHear_youth.pdf.
Battmer RD, Laszig R, Lehnhardt E. Electrically elicited stapedius reflex in cochlear implant patients. Ear Hear. 1990;11(5):370–4.
Balkany T, Hodges A, Menapace C, Hazard L, Driscoll C, Gantz B, et al. Nucleus Freedom North American clinical trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;136(5):757–62.
Brown CJ, Hughes ML, Luk B, Abbas PJ, Wolaver A, Gervais J. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the Nucleus CI24M speech processor: data from adults. Ear Hear. 2000;21:151–63.
Buchman C, Teagle H, Roush P, Park L, Hatch D, Woodard J, et al. Cochlear implantation in children with labyrinthine anomalies and cochlear nerve deficiency: implications for auditory brainstem implantation. Laryngoscope. 2011;121(9):1979–88.
Ching TYC, Burns L, Flynn C, Seeto M, Hou S, Day J, et al. Language and speech perception of young children with bimodal fitting or bilateral cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int. 2014;15 suppl 1:S43–6.
Davidson LS, Skinner MW, Holstad BA, et al. The effect of instantaneous input dynamic range setting on the speech perception of children with the nucleus 24 implant. Ear Hear. 2009;30:340–9.
Eisenberg LS, Johnson KC, Martinez AS, Cokely CG, Tobey EA, Quittner AL, et al. Speech recognition at 1-year follow-up in the childhood development after cochlear implantation study: methods and preliminary findings. Audiol Neurootol. 2006;11(4):259–68.
Estabrooks W, editor. Auditory-verbal therapy for parents and professionals. Washington, DC: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf; 1994.
Firszt JB, Holden LK, Skinner MW, et al. Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems. Ear Hear. 2004;25:375–87.
Franck KH, Norton SJ. Estimation of psychophysical levels using the electrically evoked compound action potential measured with the neural response telemetry capabilities of Cochlear Corporation’s CI24M device. Ear Hear. 2001;22:289–99.
Hodges V, Balkany TJ, Ruth RA, Lambert PR, Dolan-Ash S, Schloffman JJ. Electrical middle ear muscle reflex: use in cochlear implant programming. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117(3 Pt 1):255–61.
Holstad BA, Sonneveldt VG, Fears BT, Davidson LS, Aaron RJ, Richter M, et al. Relation of electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds to behavioral T- and C-levels in children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2009;30(1):115–27.
Hughes ML, Vander Werff KR, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Kelsay DM, Teagle HF, et al. A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in Nucleus 24 cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2001;22(6):471–86.
Hughes ML, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Wolaver AA, Gervais JP. Comparison of EAP and EABR thresholds with map levels in the Nucleus CI24M speech processor: data from children. Ear Hear. 2000;21:164–74.
Marlowe AL, Chinnici JE, Rivas A, Niparko JK, Francis HW. Revision cochlear implant surgery in children: the Johns Hopkins experience. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31(1):74–82.
Nicholas JG, Geers AE. 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. 2007;50:1048–62.
Niparko JK, Tobey EA, Thal DJ. Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. JAMA. 2010;303:1498–506.
Pollack D, Goldberg D, Caleffe-Schenck N. The development of spoken language 1: phonology and early vocalizations. In: educational audiology for the limited-hearing infant and preschooler: an auditory-verbal program (pp. 169–203). Charles C Thomas, Publisher, LTD, Springfield IL; 1997.
Schafer EC, Romine D, Sandrock C, Momin S, Musgrave E. A proposed electroacoustic test protocol for personal FM receivers coupled to cochlear implant sound processors. J Am Acad Audiol. 2013;24(10):941–54.
Seyle K, Brown CJ. Speech perception using maps based on neural response telemetry measures. Ear Hear. 2002;23(1 suppl):72S–9.
Sharma A, Dorman MF, Spahr AJ. A sensitive perioed for the development of the central auditory system in children with cochlear implants: implications for age of implantation. Ear Hear. 2002;23:532–9.
Smoorenburg GF, Willeboer C, van Dijk JE. Speech perception in Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processors settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds. Audiol Neuro Otol. 2002;7:335–47.
Soli SD, Zheng Y. Long-term reliability of pediatric cochlear implants. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31(6):899–901.
Skinner MW, Holden LK, Whitford LA, Plant KL, Psarros C, Holden TA. Speech recognition with the Nucleus 24 SPEAK, ACE, and CIS speech coding strategies in newly implanted adults. Ear Hear. 2002;23(3):207–23.
Skinner MW, Holden LK, Holden TA, et al. Speech recognition at simulated soft, conversational, and raised-to-loud vocal efforts by adults with implants. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;101:3766–82.
Skinner MW, Holden LK, Holden TA, et al. Comparison of two methods for selecting minimum stimulation levels used in programming the Nucleus 22 cochlear implant. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1999;42:814–28.
Teagle HFB, Eskridge H. Predictors of success for children with cochlear implants: the impact of individual differences. In: Weiss A, editor. Perspectives on individual differences affecting therapeutic change in communication disorders. New York: Psychology Press; 2010. p. 251–72.
Wolfe J and Schafer EC. Hearing Assistance Technology (HAT) and Cochlear Implants. In: Programming cochlear implants. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2010. p. 115–127.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Teagle, H.F.B. (2016). Cochlear Implant Programming for Children. In: Young, N., Iler Kirk, K. (eds) Pediatric Cochlear Implantation. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2788-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2788-3_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2787-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2788-3
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)