Cochlear Implantation Paper

To assess if cochlear implants (CI) provide more benefit than conventional hearing aids (HA) in prelingually deaf patients.

Cochlear implants are becoming more and more popular now. Even babies as young as 12 months are receiving a cochlear implant. For hearing parents it’s more convenient to have their child get a cochlear implant rather then to learn sign language. Hearing parents usually just look for the simple way out because they don’t want to have a child who is “different.�

A Cochlear Implant is an electronic device that partially restores hearing in people who have severe hearing loss due to damage of the inner ear and who receive limited benefit from hearing aids (http://www.cochlear.com/wps/wcm/connect/au/home/understand/hearing-and-hl/hl-treatments/cochlear-implant). In some cases there are patients whose hearing did not adjust correctly, having a risk of developing a virus, complications after the surgery, the benefits of sign language without a cochlear implant and lastly children or adults with cochlear implants may not even develop a good speech. There are many positive and negative articles I have read on cochlear implants. As a parent you are not only putting your child at risk, you are also withdrawing them from the deaf community, the one they were naturally born into. I do not support cochlear implants, children should not be implanted until they are grown to the point where they can make their own choice

In today’s society there is an ongoing debate of weather children who are deaf should receive cochlear implants. A cochlear implant is a device that takes sound wave and changes the waves into electrical activity for the brain to interpret. Wire called electrodes are surgically implanted into the cochlear nerve which receives a signal from the microphone attached to the transmitter and speech processor. The microphone captures the sound from the environment and the speech processor filters the noise versus speech. Then the transmitter sends an electrical signal through the electrodes to stimulate the cochlear nerve. Every person has a different thought depending on their experiences in their life whether deaf children should receive cochlear

Characteristics of a successful audiologist include the ability to empathize with their patients, and to convey the appropriate amount of information pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment. In re-examining my role as a clinician, I now have a better understanding on how to break down the information regarding CIs to educate my patients. Even specialists in hearing impairment such as audiologists may be unaware of the CI candidacy criteria, typical outcomes, and are uncomfortable about making the appropriate referrals. Consequently, the lack of knowledge and experience may lead to hesitancy to encourage patients to pursue a CI. To my surprise, the time length of the surgery and the rehabilitation period required for optimal use of the implant quicker than I expected. I learned that the surgery is typically completed in 2-2.5 hrs. Also, patients are discharged from the hospital the same day and seen for postoperative follow up in a week to two weeks. Activation of the implant takes place 2 to 4 weeks after surgery, allowing time for the skin to heal. After observing this surgical procedure, I now have a greater appreciation for the accuracy and precision that is required to perform a cochlear implantation. To conclude, this opportunity was a wonderful experience and the knowledge I obtained from this class will aid in my development as a future

Hearing loss continues to linger in the elderly population of today’s society. Yet, the onset of hearing loss can occur at any age and at any point in

Cochlear implants are commonly used in modern science to treat patients with deafness in one or both ears. The structure of cochlear implants are as follows, an outer component, a transmitter, a receiver-stimulator package and the microelectrode array(Sigfrid D. Soli, 2011). The outer component of a cochlear implant records sound waves, while the transmitter brings the recorded sounds to the receiver-stimulator. The receiver-stimulator then converts the recorded sound waves to electrical impulses, and brings them to the electrode array, which then stimulates the auditory nerve and provides artificial hearing(Tan, Walshe, Viani, & Al-Rubeai, 2013).

The National Institute on Deafness defines the cochlear implant as, “… a small, complex electronic device that can help to provide a sense of sound to a person who is profoundly deaf or severely hard-of-hearing.” The cochlear implant was first introduced in 1979 and it is estimated that 324,000 implants have been implanted worldwide. The surgery is proven to work better when the child being implanted is young, preferably younger than five. It is ideal to implant a child before their language or speech has developed. The FDA has approved children as young as 12-months old to receive the cochlear implant.

Bilateral and unilateral cochlear implantation are popular mode of assistance to those with severe to profound hearing impairments. The research on the effects of bilateral and unilateral cochlear implants continues to grow. However, the effect of bilateral cochlear implants versus unilateral cochlear implants on speech perception has been researched under limited criteria, such as in the presence of quiet only. There is minimal current research regarding the effects of bilateral and unilateral cochlear implants on speech perception in the presence of noise. This study represents quasi-experimental research that compares the effects of bilateral cochlear implants to unilateral cochlear implants on speech perception in the presence of noise. The hypothesis was that bilateral cochlear implants would be more effective compared to unilateral cochlear implants in regards to speech perception in noise. Forty young adults participated in this study. Twenty subjects were bilateral cochlear implant users (CI-CI) and the other 20 subjects were unilateral cochlear implant users (CI-Only). Both groups were administered two speech perception in noise tests to determine the efficacy of having two cochlear implants versus one. The results of this study indicated that bilateral cochlear implants were more effective in comparison to unilateral cochlear implants in regards to speech perception in noise. Therefore, the results supported the hypothesis that bilateral

Lets jump right into the positive facts of cochlear implants, because there isn 't many. in a very descriptive and informational article by Ron Kotulak, he mentions that, "The implant significantly improve the hearing of adults in conjunction with speech -reading. Benefits have also been observed in children as young as two." So, it is an unbiased fact that, in some cases, Cochlear Implantation is highly effective and serves as a great purpose for the treatment of hearing loss. The FDA, Food and

A cochlear implant is a surgically implanted electronic device that provides a sense of sound to a person who is profoundly deaf or severely hard of hearing. To what degree is there a difference in communicative and responsive verbal language skills in children who are fitted with a cochlear implant and children who have no hearing responsive impairment? Research validates that the cochlear implant has improved the hearing capability in children. The purpose of this project is to explain the differences in communicative and verbal language skills, performance on cognitive tasks, and reading comprehension in children with normal hearing and children with the cochlear implant.

A cochlear implant consists of an internal and external component. The internal component is surgically inserted under the skin behind the ear, and a narrow wire is threaded into the inner ear. Unlike hearing aids, cochlear implants convert sound waves to electrical impulses and transmit them to the inner ear, providing people with the ability to hear sounds and potentially better understand speech without reading lips. Speech and language ability varies among individuals, with many cochlear implant recipients developing age appropriate linguistic ability. Ability to produce accurate speech, ability to understand speech and writing and reading ability have all been studied. In May 1998, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) had been demonstrated in the long-term benefits of cochlear implants that children were not limited to speech recognition. However, it would do that as well as went into far more detail into other ways they have dramatically improved their language

Hearing loss in childhood and infancy can have a major effect on the development and continuation of language. It hinders the acoustic signal that enters the ear canal to not be fully received by the auditory cortex which then affects and distorts what we receive and how we comprehend the auditory stimuli. There are different types and degrees of severity of hearing loss that can impair one or both ears, or can be congenital. Children with a hearing loss that is either severe or profound, in both ears, sensory neural, or congenital are considered to be a candidate for a cochlear implant. Cochlear implants are the only way for these children to develop oral language and auditory skills when hearing aids are not beneficial (Jimenez-Romero, 2015).

The cochlear implant is an incredible device that all started out in the 1950s, when "Lundberg performed one of the first recorded attempts to simulate the auditory nerve with a sinusoidal current during a neurosurgical operation"(MAJOR BREAKTHROUGHS! (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2015, from http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BI108/BI108_2001_Groups/Cochlear_Implants/history.html ). After the operation his patient was able to hear noise. This device has been changing peoples lives for a long time, and with time it has improved. There are other things in this world that changed people lives, that

The correlation coefficient between the duration of discharge and the pre-op ABG is 0.4172 and that between the duration of hearing impairment with pre-op ABG is 0.3821 and is statistically significant. The correlation coefficient between the duration of discharge and the post-op ABG is 0.4544 and that between the duration of hearing impairment with post-op ABG is 0.4489 and is statistically significant, implies that the patients with lesser duration of discharge and hearing impairment had better post-operative hearing than the patients with longer duration of