Deepa Suneel1, Lisa S Davidson2,3, Judith Lieu2. 1. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Texas Austin, Austin, TX, USA. 2. Department of Otolaryngology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. 3. Program in Audiology and Communication Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Abstract
Objective: Self-reported hearing quality of life (QoL) for pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients was examined, asking whether 1) children with CIs have similar QoL as those with less severe hearing loss (HL); 2) children with different bilateral CI (BCI) device configurations report different QoL; and 3) do audiological, demographic and spoken language factors affect hearing QoL?Design: One hundred four children (ages 7-11 years) using bimodal devices or BCIs participated. The Hearing Environments and Reflection of Quality of Life (HEAR-QL) questionnaire, receptive language and speech perception tests were administered. HEAR-QL scores of CI recipients were compared to scores of age-mates with normal hearing and mild to profound HL. Results: HEAR-QL scores for CI participants were similar to those of children with less severe HL and did not differ with device configuration. Emotion identification and word recognition in noise correlated significantly with HEAR-QL scores.Discussion: CI recipients reported that HL hinders social participation. Better understanding of speech in noise and emotional content was associated with fewer hearing-related difficulties on the HEAR-QL.Conclusions: Noisy situations encountered in educational settings should be addressed for children with HL. The link between perception of emotion and hearing-related QoL for CI recipients should be further examined.
Objective: Self-reported hearing quality of life (QoL) for pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients was examined, asking whether 1) children with CIs have similar QoL as those with less severe hearing loss (HL); 2) children with different bilateral CI (BCI) device configurations report different QoL; and 3) do audiological, demographic and spoken language factors affect hearing QoL?Design: One hundred four children (ages 7-11 years) using bimodal devices or BCIs participated. The Hearing Environments and Reflection of Quality of Life (HEAR-QL) questionnaire, receptive language and speech perception tests were administered. HEAR-QL scores of CI recipients were compared to scores of age-mates with normal hearing and mild to profound HL. Results: HEAR-QL scores for CI participants were similar to those of children with less severe HL and did not differ with device configuration. Emotion identification and word recognition in noise correlated significantly with HEAR-QL scores.Discussion: CI recipients reported that HL hinders social participation. Better understanding of speech in noise and emotional content was associated with fewer hearing-related difficulties on the HEAR-QL.Conclusions: Noisy situations encountered in educational settings should be addressed for children with HL. The link between perception of emotion and hearing-related QoL for CI recipients should be further examined.
Authors: Andrea D Warner-Czyz; Betty Loy; Emily A Tobey; Paul Nakonezny; Peter S Roland Journal: Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2010-11-11 Impact factor: 1.675
Authors: V Samuel; C Gamble; H Cullington; F Bathgate; E Bennett; N Coop; J Cropper; A Emond; R Kentish; L Edwards Journal: Int J Audiol Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 2.117
Authors: Carin H Wiefferink; Carolien Rieffe; Lizet Ketelaar; Johan H M Frijns Journal: Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 1.675
Authors: K Huttunen; S Rimmanen; S Vikman; N Virokannas; M Sorri; S Archbold; M E Lutman Journal: Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2009-10-28 Impact factor: 1.675
Authors: Susan Nittrouer; Meganne Muir; Kierstyn Tietgens; Aaron C Moberly; Joanna H Lowenstein Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 2.297
Authors: Sara M Misurelli; Matthew J Goupell; Emily A Burg; Rachael Jocewicz; Alan Kan; Ruth Y Litovsky Journal: Trends Hear Date: 2020 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.293