» Articles » PMID: 18664684

Quality of Life for Children with Cochlear Implants: Perceived Benefits and Problems and the Perception of Single Words and Emotional Sounds

Overview
Date 2008 Jul 31
PMID 18664684
Citations 36
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: This study examined children's self-reported quality of life with a cochlear implant as related to children's actual perceptions of speech and the emotional information conveyed by sound. Effects of age at amplification with hearing aids and fitting of cochlear implants on perceived quality of life were also investigated.

Method: A self-reported quality of life questionnaire and assessments of speech perception (single words) and emotion identification were administered to a sample of 37 children with cochlear implants who were congenitally deaf, who were 5-14 years of age, and who all used spoken language.

Results: The children reported significant improvement in quality of life because of their cochlear implants, and they also reported low levels of concern about typical problems associated with wearing an implant. The children's perceived quality of life did not significantly predict speech perception performance at the single word level. In contrast, increased quality of life predicted better performance on the emotion identification task. Age at first use of amplification predicted perceived quality of life.

Conclusions: The findings regarding age reinforce the importance of early detection and intervention for children's positive quality of life with cochlear implants later in childhood.

Citing Articles

Hearing and sociality: the implications of hearing loss on social life.

Podury A, Jiam N, Kim M, Donnenfield J, Dhand A Front Neurosci. 2023; 17:1245434.

PMID: 37854291 PMC: 10579609. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1245434.


The Jena Audiovisual Stimuli of Morphed Emotional Pseudospeech (JAVMEPS): A database for emotional auditory-only, visual-only, and congruent and incongruent audiovisual voice and dynamic face stimuli with varying voice intensities.

von Eiff C, Kauk J, Schweinberger S Behav Res Methods. 2023; 56(5):5103-5115.

PMID: 37821750 PMC: 11289065. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-023-02249-4.


Listening evaluation of cochlear implant users: comparison of subjective and objective evaluation by visual analogue scale.

Yano T, Tomioka R, Shirai K, Nishiyama N, Tsukahara K J Laryngol Otol. 2023; 138(3):297-300.

PMID: 37646292 PMC: 10876450. DOI: 10.1017/S0022215123001445.


Health Utilities of Bilateral Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss with Assistive Devices.

Chen Y, Lin P, Fang T, Wu C, Wang P, Wang H Healthcare (Basel). 2023; 11(11).

PMID: 37297789 PMC: 10252331. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11111649.


Improvement in quality of life comparing noninvasive versus invasive hearing rehabilitation in children.

Urik M, Sikolova S, Hosnova D, Kruntorad V, Bartos M Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2023; 8(2):591-598.

PMID: 37090862 PMC: 10116959. DOI: 10.1002/lio2.1030.