Download 13th International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Other

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Auditory system wikipedia, lookup

Audiology and hearing health professionals in developed and developing countries wikipedia, lookup

Earplug wikipedia, lookup

Olivocochlear system wikipedia, lookup

Dysprosody wikipedia, lookup

Sensorineural hearing loss wikipedia, lookup

Noise-induced hearing loss wikipedia, lookup

Hearing loss wikipedia, lookup

Speech perception wikipedia, lookup

Telecommunications relay service wikipedia, lookup

Transcript
S38-7
Confrontation of quality of life to hearing performances in cochlear implantees
1
1
2
1
1
Oulahri-Lounati M. , Duvillard C. , Dan G. , Bouilly G. , Romanet P. , Bozorg Grayeli A.
1
1
Dijon Hospital University, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Dijon, France, 2Oticon Medical-Neurelec, Vallauris, France
Objectives: The quality of life (QoL) after cochlear implantation is one of the most significant outcome
parameters. It depends on multiple social, economic and psychological factors in addition to their hearing
performances. The aim of this study was to evaluate the importance of hearing performances in the QoL after
cochlear implantation.
Materials and methods: This prospective study included 112 patients who received a unilateral cochlear
implant (CI) between 1996 and 2009. In this population, 59 completed all tests and were analyzed. This group
was composed of 34 females and 25 males. The mean age was57 years (range: 15 to 85 years). Twenty-five
patients had a contralateral hearing aid (HA) with a sever hearing loss. Hearing performances were evaluated by
a free-field audiometry in quiet and noise, with and without lip-reading. The QoL was evaluated by the Nijmegen
Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ). The mean delay after CI was 63 ± 7 months (range: 1-170 months).
Results: Dissyllabic word discrimination (at 60 dB) in quiet was 11 ± 23.8 % before, and 43 ± 33.9% after
implantation with CI only and reached 52 ± 42.4% with CI + HA. In noise (cocktail party, SNR=0), dissyllabic
word discrimination was 18 ± 26.7 % with CI only, and 27 ± 31.1% with CI + HA. Average NCIQ scores ranged
from 41 to 62% depending on the domains. Age, sex and etiology did not seem to influence the scores. There
was no correlation between the scores and the hearing performances. Although patients with hearing deprivation
above 10 years had poorer hearing performances, their QoL was similar to those with shorter periods of
deprivation.
Conclusions: QoL after implantation is not correlated to hearing performances and probably depends on
multiple other factors (e.g. social, economic, and psychological). This study underlines the crucial role of
preoperative evaluation and postoperative support in all these domains.
637