Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Cochlear implant
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Outcomes == Cochlear implant outcomes can be measured using [[speech recognition]] ability and functional improvements measured using patient reported outcome measures.<ref name=":1">{{cite journal | vauthors = Dornhoffer JR, Reddy P, Meyer TA, Schvartz-Leyzac KC, Dubno JR, McRackan TR | title = Individual Differences in Speech Recognition Changes After Cochlear Implantation | journal = JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery | volume = 147 | issue = 3 | pages = 280–286 | date = March 2021 | pmid = 33410869 | doi = 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.5094 | pmc = 7791403 }}</ref><ref name=":2">{{cite journal | vauthors = McRackan TR, Velozo CA, Holcomb MA, Camposeo EL, Hatch JL, Meyer TA, Lambert PR, Melvin CL, Dubno JR | display-authors = 6 | title = Use of Adult Patient Focus Groups to Develop the Initial Item Bank for a Cochlear Implant Quality-of-Life Instrument | journal = JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery | volume = 143 | issue = 10 | pages = 975–982 | date = October 2017 | pmid = 28772297 | pmc = 5710256 | doi = 10.1001/jamaoto.2017.1182 }}</ref> While the degree of improvement after cochlear implantation may vary, the majority of patients who receive cochlear implants demonstrate a significant improvement in speech recognition ability compared to their preoperative condition.<ref name=":1" /> Multiple meta-analyses of the literature from 2018 showed that CI users have large improvements in quality of life after cochlear implantation.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = McRackan TR, Bauschard M, Hatch JL, Franko-Tobin E, Droghini HR, Nguyen SA, Dubno JR | title = Meta-analysis of quality-of-life improvement after cochlear implantation and associations with speech recognition abilities | journal = The Laryngoscope | volume = 128 | issue = 4 | pages = 982–990 | date = April 2018 | pmid = 28731538 | doi = 10.1002/lary.26738 | pmc = 5776066 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = McRackan TR, Bauschard M, Hatch JL, Franko-Tobin E, Droghini HR, Velozo CA, Nguyen SA, Dubno JR | display-authors = 6 | title = Meta-analysis of Cochlear Implantation Outcomes Evaluated With General Health-related Patient-reported Outcome Measures | journal = Otology & Neurotology | volume = 39 | issue = 1 | pages = 29–36 | date = January 2018 | pmid = 29227446 | doi = 10.1097/mao.0000000000001620 | pmc = 5728184 }}</ref> This improvement occurs in many different facets of life that extends beyond communication including improved ability to engage in social activities; decreased mental effort from listening; and improved environmental sound awareness.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hughes SE, Hutchings HA, Rapport FL, McMahon CM, Boisvert I | title = Social Connectedness and Perceived Listening Effort in Adult Cochlear Implant Users: A Grounded Theory to Establish Content Validity for a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure | journal = Ear and Hearing | volume = 39 | issue = 5 | pages = 922–934 | date = September 2018 | pmid = 29424766 | doi = 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000553 | s2cid = 46846059 | url = https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa38511 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = McRackan TR, Hand BN, Velozo CA, Dubno JR | title = Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL): Development of a Profile Instrument (CIQOL-35 Profile) and a Global Measure (CIQOL-10 Global) | journal = Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research | volume = 62 | issue = 9 | pages = 3554–3563 | date = September 2019 | pmid = 31479616 | pmc = 6808347 | doi = 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-H-19-0142 }}</ref><ref name=":2" /> Deaf adolescents with cochlear implants attending mainstream educational settings report high levels of scholastic self-esteem, friendship self-esteem, and global self-esteem.<ref name=":3">{{cite journal | vauthors = Leigh IW, Maxwell-McCaw D, Bat-Chava Y, Christiansen JB | title = Correlates of psychosocial adjustment in deaf adolescents with and without cochlear implants: a preliminary investigation | journal = Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education | volume = 14 | issue = 2 | pages = 244–259 | date = 2008-07-16 | pmid = 18854552 | doi = 10.1093/deafed/enn038 | doi-access = free }}</ref> They also tend to hold mostly positive attitudes towards their cochlear implants,<ref name=":4">{{cite journal |last1=Most |first1=Tova |last2=Wiesel |first2=Amatzia |last3=Blitzer |first3=Tamar |title=Identity and Attitudes towards Cochlear Implant Among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Adolescents |journal=Deafness & Education International |date=June 2007 |volume=9 |issue=2 |pages=68–82 |doi=10.1179/146431507790560002 }}</ref> and as a part of their identity, a majority either do "not really think about" their hearing loss, or are "proud of it."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Dammeyer |first1=Jesper |last2=Chapman |first2=Madeleine |last3=Marschark |first3=Marc |title=Experience of Hearing Loss, Communication, Social Participation, and Psychological Well-Being Among Adolescents With Cochlear Implants |journal=American Annals of the Deaf |date=2018 |volume=163 |issue=4 |pages=424–439 |doi=10.1353/aad.2018.0027 |jstor=26529752 |pmid=30344187 |s2cid=53044702 }}</ref> Though advancements in cochlear implant technology have helped patients in their understanding of language, users are still unable to understand suprasegmental portions of language, which includes pitch.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Cochlear Implant (CI) Technology and Music: Music Perception, Music Enjoyment: Information for Audiologists {{!}} Iowa Head and Neck Protocols |url=https://medicine.uiowa.edu/iowaprotocols/music-and-hearing-loss/cochlear-implant-ci-and-music/cochlear-implant-ci-pages-audiologists/cochlear |access-date=2022-04-14 |website=medicine.uiowa.edu}}</ref> A study by [[Johns Hopkins University]] determined that for a three-year-old child who receives them, cochlear implants can save $30,000 to $50,000 in special-education costs for elementary and secondary schools as the child is more likely to be mainstreamed in school and thus use fewer support services than similarly deaf children.<ref>{{cite web|date=2000-05-05|title=Do Health-Care Providers Have to Pay for Assistive Tech?|url=http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2000/nf00505c.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20000815080222/http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2000/nf00505c.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=August 15, 2000|access-date=2009-10-25|publisher=[[Business Week]]|vauthors=Williams JM}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)