Limits...
What factors are associated with good performance in children with cochlear implants? From the outcome of various language development tests, research on sensory and communicative disorders project in Japan: nagasaki experience.

Kanda Y, Kumagami H, Hara M, Sainoo Y, Sato C, Yamamoto-Fukuda T, Yoshida H, Ito A, Tanaka C, Baba K, Nakata A, Tanaka H, Fukushima K, Kasai N, Takahashi H - Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol (2012)

Bottom Line: This report discusses findings as well as factors that led to better results in children with severe-profound hearing loss.Overall, the results show that 76.2% of the scores obtained by the children in these tests exceeded the national average scores of children with hearing difficulty.In this study, we suggest that taking the above four factors into consideration will have an affect on the language development of children with severe-profound hearing loss.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Kanda ENT Clinic, Nagasaki Bell Hearing Center, Nagasaki, Japan.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: We conducted multi-directional language development tests as a part of the Research on Sensory and Communicative Disorders (RSVD) in Japan. This report discusses findings as well as factors that led to better results in children with severe-profound hearing loss.

Methods: We evaluated multiple language development tests in 33 Japanese children with cochlear implants (32 patients) and hearing aid (1 patient), including 1) Test for question and answer interaction development, 2) Word fluency test, 3) Japanese version of the Peabody picture vocabulary test-revised, 4) The standardized comprehension test of abstract words, 5) The screening test of reading and writing for Japanese primary school children, 6) The syntactic processing test of aphasia, 7) Criterion-referenced testing (CRT) for Japanese language and mathematics, 8) Pervasive development disorders ASJ rating scales, and 9) Raven's colored progressive matrices. Furthermore, we investigated the factors believed to account for the better performances in these tests. The first group, group A, consisted of 14 children with higher scores in all tests than the national average for children with hearing difficulty. The second group, group B, included 19 children that scored below the national average in any of the tests.

Results: Overall, the results show that 76.2% of the scores obtained by the children in these tests exceeded the national average scores of children with hearing difficulty. The children who finished above average on all tests had undergone a longer period of regular habilitation in our rehabilitation center, had their implants earlier in life, were exposed to more auditory verbal/oral communication in their education at affiliated institutions, and were more likely to have been integrated in a regular kindergarten before moving on to elementary school.

Conclusion: In this study, we suggest that taking the above four factors into consideration will have an affect on the language development of children with severe-profound hearing loss.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Educational method (school). A, group A; B, group B.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3369984&req=5

Figure 10: Educational method (school). A, group A; B, group B.

Mentions: The mean period of the visit at our hearing center was significantly longer in group A than in group B (P=0.049 <0.05*) (Fig. 6). The mean wearing period for the cochlear implant was significantly longer in group A than in group B (P=0.02*) (Fig. 6). The mean of the current average hearing level on their CI side was 115 dBHL for group A and 113 dBHL for group B on their CI side. On the non-operation side, it was 102.1 dBHL for group A and 97.1 dBHL for group B. The mean of the present average wearing threshold was 26.8 dBHL for group A and 28.2 dBHL for group B on their CI side. On the non-operation side, it was 59.2 dBHL for group A and 59.3 dBHL for group B. There were no significant differences in these results between the two groups (Fig. 7). Children in group A were more likely to have older siblings; however, there was no significant difference between groups A and B (Fig. 8). The mean amount of time spent studying at home on a daily basis was 76.4 minutes for group A and 79.2 minutes for group B; these times were not significantly different (Fig. 9). From the age of 1 year to the end of preschool, the education for group A concentrated on auditory verbal and/or oral methods, while that for group B was geared towards sign or cued speech type education; there were significant differences between groups A and B (P=0.003 <0.01**) (Fig. 10).


What factors are associated with good performance in children with cochlear implants? From the outcome of various language development tests, research on sensory and communicative disorders project in Japan: nagasaki experience.

Kanda Y, Kumagami H, Hara M, Sainoo Y, Sato C, Yamamoto-Fukuda T, Yoshida H, Ito A, Tanaka C, Baba K, Nakata A, Tanaka H, Fukushima K, Kasai N, Takahashi H - Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol (2012)

Educational method (school). A, group A; B, group B.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3369984&req=5

Figure 10: Educational method (school). A, group A; B, group B.
Mentions: The mean period of the visit at our hearing center was significantly longer in group A than in group B (P=0.049 <0.05*) (Fig. 6). The mean wearing period for the cochlear implant was significantly longer in group A than in group B (P=0.02*) (Fig. 6). The mean of the current average hearing level on their CI side was 115 dBHL for group A and 113 dBHL for group B on their CI side. On the non-operation side, it was 102.1 dBHL for group A and 97.1 dBHL for group B. The mean of the present average wearing threshold was 26.8 dBHL for group A and 28.2 dBHL for group B on their CI side. On the non-operation side, it was 59.2 dBHL for group A and 59.3 dBHL for group B. There were no significant differences in these results between the two groups (Fig. 7). Children in group A were more likely to have older siblings; however, there was no significant difference between groups A and B (Fig. 8). The mean amount of time spent studying at home on a daily basis was 76.4 minutes for group A and 79.2 minutes for group B; these times were not significantly different (Fig. 9). From the age of 1 year to the end of preschool, the education for group A concentrated on auditory verbal and/or oral methods, while that for group B was geared towards sign or cued speech type education; there were significant differences between groups A and B (P=0.003 <0.01**) (Fig. 10).

Bottom Line: This report discusses findings as well as factors that led to better results in children with severe-profound hearing loss.Overall, the results show that 76.2% of the scores obtained by the children in these tests exceeded the national average scores of children with hearing difficulty.In this study, we suggest that taking the above four factors into consideration will have an affect on the language development of children with severe-profound hearing loss.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Kanda ENT Clinic, Nagasaki Bell Hearing Center, Nagasaki, Japan.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: We conducted multi-directional language development tests as a part of the Research on Sensory and Communicative Disorders (RSVD) in Japan. This report discusses findings as well as factors that led to better results in children with severe-profound hearing loss.

Methods: We evaluated multiple language development tests in 33 Japanese children with cochlear implants (32 patients) and hearing aid (1 patient), including 1) Test for question and answer interaction development, 2) Word fluency test, 3) Japanese version of the Peabody picture vocabulary test-revised, 4) The standardized comprehension test of abstract words, 5) The screening test of reading and writing for Japanese primary school children, 6) The syntactic processing test of aphasia, 7) Criterion-referenced testing (CRT) for Japanese language and mathematics, 8) Pervasive development disorders ASJ rating scales, and 9) Raven's colored progressive matrices. Furthermore, we investigated the factors believed to account for the better performances in these tests. The first group, group A, consisted of 14 children with higher scores in all tests than the national average for children with hearing difficulty. The second group, group B, included 19 children that scored below the national average in any of the tests.

Results: Overall, the results show that 76.2% of the scores obtained by the children in these tests exceeded the national average scores of children with hearing difficulty. The children who finished above average on all tests had undergone a longer period of regular habilitation in our rehabilitation center, had their implants earlier in life, were exposed to more auditory verbal/oral communication in their education at affiliated institutions, and were more likely to have been integrated in a regular kindergarten before moving on to elementary school.

Conclusion: In this study, we suggest that taking the above four factors into consideration will have an affect on the language development of children with severe-profound hearing loss.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus