Inclusion Criteria

Most doctors recommend that children with cochlear implant only use spoken language as a method of communication so they can maximize the benefits from the cochlear implant. However, the popular method of communication for children with cochlear implants is total communication which is the integration of oral communication and ASL. Although Heather Artinian was fluent in ASL before she received her cochlear implant, she was able to communicate with hearing and deaf people through both ASL and spoken language after years of intensive speech therapy (Aronson, Sound and Fury: Six Years Later). When cochlear implant users take it off, they cannot hear any sounds so they are technically still deaf. Even though they are able to hear sounds, cochlear implant recipients will not be able to identify themselves as hearing individuals. When they bridge the gap between the deaf and hearing world, they can still be a part of both cultures without defining themselves as a part of only one culture (TedX: The Heather World). Therefore, the cochlear implant can be a great device for deaf people who want to stay in the Deaf community but still be able to take advantage of additional opportunities in the hearing

This article "I Have a Child With a Cochlear Implant in My Preschool Classroom. Now, What?" by Carrie A. Davenport and Sheila R. Albert-Morgan dealt with the issue of exploring the fact that although cochlear implant technology is progressing rapidly through the years, there is however still a lack of capacity at the school level. This article also provides awareness of what individualized education program (IEP) teams can practice while raising the learning skills of a deaf child who uses cochlear implants. The main focus of this article is to help teachers provide the best education for children who are deaf and use cochlear implants while in classrooms, by implementing ways teachers can provide the appropriate accommodations to their students,

Before the panel discussion, I never took the time to think about how much time and consideration a parent must go through when deciding whether or not they should implant their child with cochlear implants. After watching Sound and Fury, I learned the importance of the Deaf community and their culture and that cochlear implants are not always seen as a good thing. Hearing from the perspective of our guests, and seeing this decision from the eyes of audiologists/teachers of the Deaf, I see that cochlear implantation is anything but an easy decision.

To conduct the study, researchers gathered 154 people with mild to moderate hearing loss between the ages of 55 and 79. These participants were split into three groups. One group worked with an audiologist to have their hearing aid properly fitted and programmed. Members of another group were given hearing aids that had been pre-programmed in the same way that OTC devices would be. The final group served as a control group and were given non-functioning hearing aids. All three groups tested their hearing aids for six weeks.

Sample population: The diagnosis for this study was looking at children that had CAS, which was determined through a 2-hour assessment. The eligibility criteria were a CAS diagnosis, between the ages of 4 and 12 years old, good receptive language skills based on CELF-4 or CELF-P2, normal hearing and vision, one parent and the child had to be native Australian English speakers, and no other disorders could be noted. The sample was gathered by contacting SLP’s throughout Australia by mail and email. It appears that they used a convenience sampling technique. The key demographics showed that there were 18 boys and eight girls. Also, there were no key differences between the two groups for “any baseline variables, primary and secondary outcome measures, and CAS severity” (p. 673). There was no n listed in this article.

The specific inclusion criteria for program enrollment included (a) offenders who reported for Level 2 or 3 probation, (b) had a recommendation or mandate for substance abuse screening in their sentencing order or had a substance abuse screen ordered by the PO at intake, (c) had a probation duration of 6 months or longer, (d) were age 18 years or older, (e) spoke English, and (f) failed their initial urinalysis. Exclusion criteria were (a) diagnosed current and known DSM-IV-R psychotic disorder, (b) current conviction for sex offense (specialized caseload), (c) evidence of neuropsychological dysfunction, (d) life expectancy of less than 6 months, and (e) probation or parole requirements that prevented protocol participation. The final sample

Nearly 5,000 Deaf infants are born each year, showing to be two in 1000 children, with eight in 1,000 likely to turn deaf within a few years)(Helfand, 2002, Para #5) Whenever this happens, parents are faced with a decision; keep their children as deaf or work to take measures to counteract their deafness. Within that lies another decision; what form of communication to use when speaking with your child. In my own case, I would rather provide my child with hearing aids until they were at a reasonable age to decide whether they wanted a cochlear implant or remain with hearing aids. For the purpose of efficiency later on in the child's life, I would want to teach my child both oral speech and ASL.

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

There are inclusion and exclusion criteria for both studies. Inclusion criteria by Chiu, H. C., Ada, L., (2016) were, the study must randomise or quasi-randomised trial for children with hemiplegic CP with any level of disability, aged and below 18 years old and constraint-induced movement therapy and restraint applied on non-affected during supervised activity and practice of the more affected upper limb and exclusion criteria were research design, not RCT, intervention not only CIMT or mCIMT, participants not only hemiplegia, no supervised practice during restraint, both groups received CIMT, and control unsuitable.

In the article “Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches” the authors talked about children need regularly and meaningfully accessible to human language. Children that have not acquired a language in the early years might never speak fluently in any language. This critical period is for children to develop their first language skills. Most children that are born deaf in the developed countries have cochlear devices implanted, but these devices do not offer accessible language to many deaf children. This device might cause the child to miss the critical period that is needed for children.

Many studies, including many of this authors’ own (underlined), were cited in relation to and support of this study; studies showing— that children as young as 16 to 24 months of

Being able to hear and listen is an important part of communicating, recreation, socialization, education, work, and life itself. For individuals who are profoundly deaf or severely hard of hearing don’t have the same experience. However, there is a therapy known as Auditory Verbal Therapy which provides a chance for an individual be able to hear again and live a normal life. The Auditory Verbal Therapy is a specialized therapy that was designed to teach children and adults the use of hearing that is provided by a cochlear implant to understand speech and be able to learn to talk.

Sounds good, Morgan. But, what is your inclusion and exclusion criteria for your sample? I was just wondering if other medical conditions were considered. Non-compliance is a commonn finding in primary care, but trying to manage a patient's blood pressure in the presence of hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and obesity is challenging. Good luck, and I am looking forward to hearing more.

My second claim is that the hearing family or-or hard of hearing have to make sure that their deaf child who is between 3 to five years should know minimum the basics of the sign language before doing the cochlear implants surgery. A first reason why it is important that the family should to do the cochlear implants to their deaf child after he/she learns to use the sign language is that sign language will give the family a chance to understand and accept the Deaf community. According to the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association(ASHA), a national professional, international scientific, and credentialing association, states that since one of the most important methods after the cochlear implant surgery is to follow it up with numbers of rehabilitation services and pronunciation practicing, the child at this point should know the foundation of the sign language (ASHA). Knowing some of the sign languages will allow the deaf child and the pronunciation coach to communicate easily. The deaf children who have difficulties in understanding speech, but using sign language before planting, it can significantly improve their communication skills. Teaching the deaf child the sign language before the surgery can help him/her to use it as another communication method that supports the spoken language as well, hence, they will be understood much easier.

Children with hearing loss vary in the degree they can hear, and the learning environment they have. As technology becomes more and more advanced, hearing aids and cochlear implants are more common. With these new changes, the deaf community might face a challenge that is new to them.