COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

[Modification of thresholds T in cochlear implant patients as an alternative programming time in relation to the time].

INTRODUCTION: Programming the cochlear implant (CI) has always been a challenge for all medical specialists in audiology, especially in pediatric patients without language secondary profound hearing loss. For this reason are searched alternatives to achieve normal hearing with the implant during programming in the shortest time possible.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether through modification threshold T we get faster audiological threshold, describe the differences in time found in patients with sensorineural hearing loss IC users with thresholds T at 10% modified, and T thresholds modified according to clinical responses after obtaining audiological threshold within normal parameters and report the speech coding strategies commonly used at the start of the program and to reach above the hearing threshold to language area.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed an observational, cross-sectional, descriptive, comparative study in which we evaluated a total of 31 patients with sensorineural hearing loss, under six years, and both sexes, of cochlear implant users of Advanced Bionics, which were divided in two groups: Group I: 15 patients with modification of thresholds T to 10%, following the manufacturer's recommendations (unmodified) and Group II: 16 patients with T threshold modification according to clinical response cochlear (modified). Were reported strategies most used speech coding in both groups at the start of the program and to reach the threshold audiological within normal parameters.

RESULTS: In patients in group I (not modified) were 256 days on average to reach threshold audiological and group II (modified) was 335.6 days. Without statistic significant p = 0.197, with an average of 295.8 days for both groups and the speech coding strategy more used was the Hi-Res P with Fidelity 120, modifying both groups only one patient from power up obtaining threshold.

CONCKUSIONS: It was established that thresholds T patient's subjective threshold as compared to T of 10% automatically obtained by SoundWave is not necessary since there are no statistically significant differences in relation to time to take patients implanted normal hearing threshold. The speech coding strategies more widely used and accepted by the patient was the Hi-Res P with Fidelity 120.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app