INTRODUCTION: In this paper, the authors analyze the auditory rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in adults with hearing impairment after head trauma, comparing their performance with that of other cochlear implant (CI) adult users who have post-lingual hearing impairment with other etiologies. METHODS: The participants were divided into two groups: group 1 (N = 14) composed of CI adult users who have acquired severe to profound hearing loss after head trauma; group 2 (N = 231) composed of CI adult users who have severe to profound hearing loss from other etiologies. Performance was assessed using the following tests: tonal audiometry, speech audiometry, consonantal phonemes identification test, 100 words test, 100 words through the telephone test, monosyllables test, numbers test, sentences test, and sentences through the telephone test. RESULTS: Average results from group 1 were lower when compared with those of group 2 in all the tests used. No statistically significant difference was found for most tests. Statistically significant difference was found for consonantal phonemes identification test, 100 words through the telephone test, monosyllables test (when analyzed regarding the phonemes correctly repeated), and sentences through the telephone test. DISCUSSION: The performance of the group of CI adult users who have acquired hearing impairment after head trauma was globally lower than that observed on the group of hearing impairment with other etiologies. However, the difference was not statistically significant for most tests. Despite this difference in performance, the results from the group of CI adult users who have acquired hearing impairment after head trauma show the effectiveness of auditory rehabilitation through cochlear implantation in these situations.
INTRODUCTION: In this paper, the authors analyze the auditory rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in adults with hearing impairment after head trauma, comparing their performance with that of other cochlear implant (CI) adult users who have post-lingual hearing impairment with other etiologies. METHODS: The participants were divided into two groups: group 1 (N = 14) composed of CI adult users who have acquired severe to profound hearing loss after head trauma; group 2 (N = 231) composed of CI adult users who have severe to profound hearing loss from other etiologies. Performance was assessed using the following tests: tonal audiometry, speech audiometry, consonantal phonemes identification test, 100 words test, 100 words through the telephone test, monosyllables test, numbers test, sentences test, and sentences through the telephone test. RESULTS: Average results from group 1 were lower when compared with those of group 2 in all the tests used. No statistically significant difference was found for most tests. Statistically significant difference was found for consonantal phonemes identification test, 100 words through the telephone test, monosyllables test (when analyzed regarding the phonemes correctly repeated), and sentences through the telephone test. DISCUSSION: The performance of the group of CI adult users who have acquired hearing impairment after head trauma was globally lower than that observed on the group of hearing impairment with other etiologies. However, the difference was not statistically significant for most tests. Despite this difference in performance, the results from the group of CI adult users who have acquired hearing impairment after head trauma show the effectiveness of auditory rehabilitation through cochlear implantation in these situations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Auditory rehabilitation; Cochlear implant; Head trauma