OBJECTIVES: To determine which demographic or performance variables are associated with inconsistent use of a second implant in pediatric recipients of sequential bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on pediatric recipients of sequential bilateral CIs. Children were divided into two age groups, 5-9 and 10-17 years of age. For each group, we examined whether inconsistent use of the second implant (CI-2) was associated with a variety of demographic variables, or speech-perception scores. RESULTS: In children aged 5-9 years, inconsistent use of CI-2 was not significantly associated with any demographic variable, but was related to both the word-recognition score with CI-2, and the difference in word-recognition scores between the first implant (CI-1) and CI-2. In children aged 10-17 years, these relationships were not significant due to smaller number of subjects. Finally, CI-2 word-recognition scores across all children were significantly correlated with the age of implantation for both CI-1 and CI-2, and the time between CI-1 and CI-2 surgeries. DISCUSSION: Speech-recognition scores obtained with CI-2, and the extent to which it differs from CI-1, are most closely related with inconsistent use of CI-2 in pediatric sequential implantees. These results are consistent with similar data previously reported by other investigators. While children implanted with CI-2 at a later age generally perform more poorly, most children still use both implants, and benefit from CI-2 even when receiving the implant as an adolescent. CONCLUSION: In pediatric recipients of sequential bilateral CIs, inconsistent use of CI-2 is related to the speech recognition scores with CI-2, and the difference in speech-recognition scores between CI-1 and CI-2. In addition, speech-recognition scores with CI-2 are related to the amount of time between CI-1 and CI-2 surgeries, and the age of implantation for both CI-1 and CI-2.
OBJECTIVES: To determine which demographic or performance variables are associated with inconsistent use of a second implant in pediatric recipients of sequential bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on pediatric recipients of sequential bilateral CIs. Children were divided into two age groups, 5-9 and 10-17 years of age. For each group, we examined whether inconsistent use of the second implant (CI-2) was associated with a variety of demographic variables, or speech-perception scores. RESULTS: In children aged 5-9 years, inconsistent use of CI-2 was not significantly associated with any demographic variable, but was related to both the word-recognition score with CI-2, and the difference in word-recognition scores between the first implant (CI-1) and CI-2. In children aged 10-17 years, these relationships were not significant due to smaller number of subjects. Finally, CI-2 word-recognition scores across all children were significantly correlated with the age of implantation for both CI-1 and CI-2, and the time between CI-1 and CI-2 surgeries. DISCUSSION: Speech-recognition scores obtained with CI-2, and the extent to which it differs from CI-1, are most closely related with inconsistent use of CI-2 in pediatric sequential implantees. These results are consistent with similar data previously reported by other investigators. While children implanted with CI-2 at a later age generally perform more poorly, most children still use both implants, and benefit from CI-2 even when receiving the implant as an adolescent. CONCLUSION: In pediatric recipients of sequential bilateral CIs, inconsistent use of CI-2 is related to the speech recognition scores with CI-2, and the difference in speech-recognition scores between CI-1 and CI-2. In addition, speech-recognition scores with CI-2 are related to the amount of time between CI-1 and CI-2 surgeries, and the age of implantation for both CI-1 and CI-2.