Receptive language as a predictor of cochlear implant outcome for prelingually deaf adults

Abstract

Objective: This study investigated outcomes and predictive factors, specifically language skills, for a group of prelingually hearing-impaired adults who received a cochlear implant. Design: Speech perception data, demographic information, and other related variables such as communication mode, residual hearing, and receptive language abilities were explored. Pre- and post-implant speech perception scores were compared and multiple regression analysis was used to identify significant predictive relationships. Study sample: The study included 43 adults with a prelingual onset of hearing loss, who proceeded with cochlear implantation at the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Results: The majority of patients experienced benefit from their cochlear implants, with 88% demonstrating significant improvement in speech perception performance. Volunteers achieved better post-operative speech perception scores if they had a shorter duration of severe-to-profound hearing loss, better language skills, and used an exclusively oral communication mode. Conclusions: Although post-operative speech perception performance is significantly poorer for prelingually hearing-impaired adults compared to postlingually hearing-impaired patients, the study group demonstrated significant benefit from their cochlear implants. The variability in post-operative outcomes can be predicted to some extent from the hearing history and language abilities of the individual patient.

Key Words:

• Cochlear implants
• receptive language
• outcomes
• prelingual hearing loss

Acknowledgements

Approval for this study was granted by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. This study was presented as a poster at the 12th International Conference on Cochlear Implants, Baltimore, USA: ‘Prediction of Outcomes for Prelingually Deaf Adults Using Cochlear Implants,’May 2012. The authors would like to acknowledge the work of Ennur Erbasi -Yanbay, (Communication Disability Centre, University of Queensland, Australia) who collected some of this data as part of her Masters of Clinical Audiology thesis project at Melbourne University. The authors would also like to thank the staff and patients of the Cochlear Implant Clinic, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, for supporting this project.

Declarations of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest.