Hearing and Life Quality Assessment in Post-Language Patients Following Cochlear Implant

Giselle de Martin Truzzi; Raquel Andrade Lauria; Alexandre Caixeta Guimar&#227; es; Sílvia Badur Curi; Arthur Menino Castilho; Jorge Rizzato Paschoal; Luciane Calonga; Walter Adriano Bianchini; Guilherme Machado de Carvalho

doi:10.4236/oalib.1102178

Home > Journals > Biomedical & Life Sciences | Business & Economics > OALibJ

OALibJ> Vol.2 No.12, December 2015

Share This Article:

Open Access

Hearing and Life Quality Assessment in Post-Language Patients Following Cochlear Implant

Abstract Full-Text HTML XML

Download as PDF (Size:554KB) PP. 1-6

DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1102178 590 Downloads 1,062 Views

Author(s) Leave a comment

Giselle de Martin Truzzi, Raquel Andrade Lauria, Alexandre Caixeta Guimarães, Sílvia Badur Curi, Arthur Menino Castilho, Jorge Rizzato Paschoal, Luciane Calonga, Walter Adriano Bianchini, Guilherme Machado de Carvalho^*

Affiliation(s)

Otology, Audiology and Implantable Ear Prostheses Ear, Nose, Throat and Head & Neck Surgery Department, Campinas University, São Paulo, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Hearing loss affects millions of people worldwide, leading some of those to economic impairment, social segregation, and a worse quality of life. Cochlear implants have shown advantages over other treatment alternatives, for it provides considerable hearing gains and therefore greater social interaction possibilities to the affected individuals. Objectives: Speech perception testing and the World Health Organization’s Quality of Life Questionnaire (WHOQOL) are used to assess the hearing outcomes and the quality of life of post-lingual patients with severe/profound bilateral neurosensorial hearing loss treated with cochlear implant (Medel). Methods: Speech perception tests are applied to selected subjects prior to and following the cochlear implant using Med-EL CI; the questionnaires assessing quality of life are answered afterwards. Results: There is an improvement in the audiometric thresholds, and the patients present a good quality of life after cochlear implant. Conclusion: The evaluation of these subjects permits to conclude that there are improvements in hearing, and that patients perceive their quality of life to be good after being subjected to cochlear implant.

KEYWORDS

Cochlear Implants, Satisfaction, Quality of Life, Hearing Loss

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Truzzi, G. , Lauria, R. , Guimarães, A. , Curi, S. , Castilho, A. , Paschoal, J. , Calonga, L. , Bianchini, W. and Carvalho, G. (2015) Hearing and Life Quality Assessment in Post-Language Patients Following Cochlear Implant. Open Access Library Journal, 2, 1-6. doi: 10.4236/oalib.1102178.

References

[1]	Deafness and Hearing loss. World Health Organization. www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs300/en

[2]	Budenz, C.L., Cosetti, M.K., Coelho, D.H., Birenbaum, B., Babb, J., Waltzman, S.B. and Roehm, P.C. (2011) The Effects of Cochlear Implantation on Speech Perception in Older Adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 59, 446-453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03310.x

[3]	Penaranda, A., et al. (2012) Beneficios económicos del implante coclear para la hipoacusia sensorineural profunda. Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública, 31, 325-331.

[4]	Cochlear Implants. National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorder. http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/coch.aspx

[5]	Goodman, A. (1965) Reference Zero Levels for Pure-Tone Audiometers. ASHA, 7, 262-273.

[6]	Bevilacqua, M.C., Banhara, M.R., da Costa, E.A., Vignoly, A.B. and Alvarenga, K.F. (2008) Brazilian Portuguese Hearing in Noise Test. International Journal of Audiology, 47, 364-365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14992020701870205

[7]	(2002) Whoqol-Hiv Instrument, Mental Health: Evidence and Research Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence. World Health Organization, Geneva. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/77774/1/WHO_MSD_MER_Rev.2012.01_eng.pdf?ua=1

[8]	(2002) Quality of Life-BREF (WHOQOL-BREF). World Health Organization, Geneva. http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/whoqolbref/en/

[9]	Gaylor, J.M., Raman, G., Chung, M., Lee, J., Rao, M., Lau, J. and Poe, D.S. (2013) Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JAMA Otolaryngology—Head & Neck Surgery, 139, 265-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2013.1744

[10]	Castilho, A.M., Pauna, H.F., Fernandes, F.L., Bonhin, R.G., Guimarães, A.C., de Melo, T.M., Cheng, M., Sartorato, E.L., de Carvalho, G.M. and Paschoal, J.R. (2015) HiFocus Helix™ Electrode Insertion: Surgical Approach. BMC Research Notes, 15, 304.

[11]	Capretta, N.R. and Moberly, A.C. (2015) Does Quality of Life Depend on Speech Recognition Performance for Adult Cochlear Implant useRs?Laryngoscope, in press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lary.25525

[12]	Kobosko, J., Jedrzejczak, W.W., Pilka, E., Pankowska, A., Skarzynski, H. (2015) Satisfaction with Cochlear Implants in Postlingually Deaf Adults and Its Nonaudiological Predictors:Psychological Distress, Coping Strategies, and Self-Esteem. Ear and Hearing, 36, 605-618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000179