A longitudinal study of electrical stimulation levels and electrode impedance in children using the Clarion cochlear implant

References

• Hughes ML, Vander Werff KR, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Kelsay DMR, Teagle HFB, 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: 471–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overstreet, EH, Belagaje, SR, Kirk, KI, Lormore, K, Wang, K, Zwolen, TA. Analysis of programming levels as a possible outcome predictor: a cross-device study of pediatric and adult cochlear implant users. Poster presented at the Conference for Implantable Prostheses, Asilomar, CA, USA, August, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Henkin Y, Kaplan-Neeman R, Muchnik C, Kronenberg J, Hildesheimer M. Changes over time in the psycho-electric parameters in children with cochlear implants. Int J Aud 2003; 42: 274–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henkin Y, Kaplan-Neeman R, Muchnik C, Kronenberg J, Hildesheimer M. Changes over time in thresholds, comfortable levels, and impedance in children using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2003; 67: 873–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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 24 speech processor: data from adults. Ear Hear 2000; 21: 151–63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes ML, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Wolaver AA, Gervais JP. Comparison of EAP thresholds with MAP levels in the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant: data from children. Ear Hear 2000; 21: 164–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thai-Van H, Truy E, Charasse B, Boutitie F, Chanal JM, Cochard N, et al. Modeling the relationship between psychophysical perception and electrically evoked compound action potential threshold in young cochlear implant recipients: clinical implications for implant fitting. Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 115: 2811–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown CJ, Hughes ML, Lopez SM, Abbas PJ. Relationship between EABR thresholds and levels used to program the CLARION speech processor. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 1999; 177: 50–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Truy E, Gallego S, Chanal JM, Collet L, Morgon A. Correlation between electrical auditory brainstem response and perceptual thresholds in Digisonic cochlear implant users. Laryngoscope 1998; 108: 554–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bresnihan M, Norman G, Scott F, Viani L. Measurement of comfort levels by means of electrical stapedial reflex in children. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001; 127: 963–6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thai-Van H, Chanal JM, Coudert C, Veuillet E, Truy E, Collet L. Relationship between NRT measurements and behavioral levels in children with the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant may change over time: preliminary report. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2001; 58: 153–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franck KH. A model of a Nucleus 24 cochlear implant fitting protocol based on the electrically evoked whole nerve action potential. Ear Hear 2002; 23: 67S–71S
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, W, Walzman, S. Changes in electrical thresholds over time in young children implanted with the Nucleus cochlear prosthesis. In:. GM Clark, Cowan, RSC, eds. International Cochlear Implant, Speech and Hearing Symposium – Melbourne. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 1995;104:177–8.
   Google Scholar
• Kubo T, Iwaki T, Ohkusa M, Doi K, Uno A, Yamamoto K, et al. Auditory plasticity in cochlear implant patients. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1996; 116: 224–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butts, SL, Hodges, AV, Dolan-Ash, S, Balkany, TJ. Changes in stimulation levels over time in Nucleus 22 cochlear implant users. In:. GJ Gantz, Tyler, RS, Rubinstein, JT, eds. 7th Symposium on Cochlear Implants in Children. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl, 2000;109, (S185):53–6.
   Google Scholar
• Swanson, B, Seligman, P, Carter, P. Impedance measurement of the nucleus 22-electrode array in patients. In:. GM Clark, Cowan, RSC, eds. International Cochlear Implant, Speech and Hearing Symposium – Melbourne. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 1995;104:141–4.
   Google Scholar
• Busby PA, Plant KL, Whitford LA. Electrode impedance in adults and children using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Cochlear Implants International 2002; 3: 87–103
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dorman MF, Smith LM, Dankowski K, McCandless G, Parkin JL. Long term measures of electrode impedance and auditory thresholds in the Ineraid cochlear implant. J Speech Hear Res 1992; 35: 1126–30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kawano A, Seldon HL, Clark GM, Ramsden RT, Raine CH. Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1998; 118: 313–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller AL, Morris DJ, Pfingst BE. Effects of time after deafening and implantation on guinea pig electrical detection thresholds. Hear Res 2000; 144: 175–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu J, Shepherd RK, Millard RE, Clark GM. Chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve at high stimulus rates: a physiological and histopathological study. Hear Res 1997; 105: 1–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfingst BE, Morris DJ, Miller AL. Effects of electrode configuration on threshold functions for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 1995; 85: 76–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKay CM, Remine MD, McDermott HJ. Loudness summation for pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea: effects of rate, electrode separation, level, and mode of stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 2001; 110: 1514–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geier LL, Norton SJ. The effects of limiting the number of Nucleus 22 cochlear implant electrodes programmed on speech perception. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 340–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar