PubMed · 911125
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J P Fombeur, M Levistre, J L Colette. 1977. [Hearing through electromagnetic induction].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/911125/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the speech perception skills of prelingually deafened French children with preoperative residual hearing who received multichannel cochlear implants. DESIGN: The design of the study incorporated a within-subject, repeated measures design for assessing speech perception skills. SETTING: Montpellier, Toulouse and Lyon Pediatric Cochlear Implant Centers. SUBJECTS: Seven prelingually deafened children demonstrating marginal benefit from conventional amplification prior to implantation with a Nucleus multichannel cochlear implant, served as subjects for the speech perception assessment (a speech recognition score less than 30% defines marginal benefit from acoustic amplification on open set materials). The mean age at implantation was 7 years, 9 months. OUTCOME MEASURES: Speech perception skills were assessed using open set materials and the MUSS and MAIS questionnaires. RESULTS: Open-set speech recognition averaged 21.4% before implantation, and 83.6% after 1 year's cochlear implant experience. All children demonstrated an open-set score over 60% after 12 months of CI use. MAIS test scores averaged 18.1/40 before implantation and 35.1/40 after 9 months of CI use. MUSS test scores averaged 24.4/40 before implantation and 34.1/40 after 9 months of CI use. CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implantation should be considered for prelingually hearing impaired children demonstrating marginal benefit from hearing aids, with a speech recognition score less than 30% on open set materials, in order to improve their speech discrimination skills.
OBJECTIVE: We applied mutation screening in seven cochlear implant users to identify those persons with GJB2-related deafness to determine whether etiology of deafness was predictive of speech performance after implantation. METHODS: Direct sequence of GJB2 was conducted over seven cochlear implant users with prelingual hearing impairment and their speech, language and cognitive performance was examined. RESULTS: The three persons with GJB2-related deafness had a mean vocabulary of 1243 words compared to a mean vocabulary of 195 words in the four children with GJB2-unrelated deafness, although the number of patients examined here was limited. The developmental quotient (DQ) of cognitive ability also was higher in those children with GJB2-related deafness. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results suggest that better speech performance after cochlear implantation may be observed in persons with GJB2-related deafness. In the future, detailed phenotypic studies and mutation screening for non-syndromic hearing loss may play an important role in the preoperative assessment of prelingually-deafened children.
Turning fork tests are used routinely by many otologists. A different group of otologists find the tests inconsistent and unreliable. This controversy has probably developed because the audiometer has replaced the tuning fork in hearing measurement. Some principles of the Weber- and Rinne-tuning fork test are shortly described. The necessary control of pure tone audiometry by tuning forks is pointed out. The value particularly in the diagnosis of conductive hearing loss, and the tuning fork's limitations are discussed.