RSS-Feed abonnieren
PDF herunterladen
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1750201
Multidisciplinary Cognitive Function Assessment of Good versus Poor Performance in Children with Cochlear Implants: An Observational Cross-Sectional Study
Abstract
Introduction Despite the developing technology of cochlear implants (CIs), implanted prelingual hearing-impaired children exhibit variable speech processing outcomes. When these children match in personal and implant-related criteria, the CI outcome variability could be related to higher-order cognitive impairment.
Objectives To evaluate different domains of cognitive function in good versus poor CI performers using a multidisciplinary approach and to find the relationship between these functions and different levels of speech processing.
Methods This observational, cross-sectional study used the word recognition score (WRS) test to categorize 40 children with CIs into 20 good (WRS/65%) and 20 poor performers (WRS < 65%). All participants were examined for speech processing at different levels (auditory processing and spoken language) and cognitive functioning using (1) verbal tests (verbal component of Stanford-Binet intelligence [SBIS], auditory memory, auditory vigilance, and P300); and (2) performance tasks (performance components of SBIS, and trail making test).
Results The outcomes of speech processing at different functional levels and both domains of cognitive function were analyzed and correlated.
Speech processing was impaired significantly in poor CI performers. This group also showed a significant cognitive function deficit, in which the verbal abilities were more affected (in 93.5%) than in the good performers (in 69.5%). Moreover, cognitive function revealed a significant correlation and predictive effect on the CI speech outcomes.
Conclusion Cognitive function impairment represented an important factor that underlies the variable speech proficiency in cochlear-implanted children. A multidisciplinary evaluation of cognitive function would provide a comprehensive overview to improve training strategies.
Keywords
cochlear implantation - cognitive function - P300 - trail making test - children - auditory processingPublikationsverlauf
Eingereicht: 02. Dezember 2021
Angenommen: 17. April 2022
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
04. August 2023
© 2023. Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil
-
References
- 1 Ibraheem OA, Kolkaila EA, Nada EH, Gad NH. Auditory cortical processing in cochlear-implanted children with different language outcomes. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2020; 277 (07) 1875-1883
- 2 Ismaail NM, Shalaby AA, Ibraheem OA, Elsayed AAE. Temporal resolution in school-age children with cochlear dead regions. J Am Acad Audiol 2019
- 3 Phan J, Houston DM, Ruffin C, Ting J, Holt RF. Factors affecting speech discrimination in children with cochlear implants: Evidence from early-implanted infants. J Am Acad Audiol 2016; 27 (06) 480-488
- 4 Ortmann M, Zwitserlood P, Knief A. et al. When hearing is tricky: Speech processing strategies in prelingually deafened children and adolescents with cochlear implants having good and poor speech performance. PloS One 2017; 12 (01) e0168655
- 5 Eppsteiner RW, Shearer AE, Hildebrand MS. et al. Prediction of cochlear implant performance by genetic mutation: the spiral ganglion hypothesis. Hear Res 2012; 292 (1-2): 51-58
- 6 Almomani F, Al-Momani MO, Garadat S. et al. Cognitive functioning in Deaf children using Cochlear implants. BMC Pediatr 2021; 21 (01) 71
- 7 Trimmel K, Schätzer J, Trimmel M. Acoustic noise alters selective attention processes as indicated by direct current (DC) brain potential changes. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2014; 11 (10) 9938-9953
- 8 Baddeley A. Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford University Press; : Oxford psychology series, 2007
- 9 Dahan D, Tanenhaus MK. Continuous mapping from sound to meaning in spoken-language comprehension: immediate effects of verb-based thematic constraints. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 2004; 30 (02) 498-513
- 10 Hassaan M, Tawfik S, El-danasoury I, Shalaby A. Development of an Arabic remediation program for central auditory processing disorders in children [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ain shams University, 2005
- 11 Melika LK. The Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale. 4th ed. In: Arabic Examiner's Handbook. Egypt, Cairo: Dar El Maref Publishing; 1998
- 12 Ghiselli S, Gheller F, Trevisi P, Favaro E, Martini A, Ermani M. Restoration of auditory network after cochlear implant in prelingual deafness: a P300 study using LORETA. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2020; 40 (01) 64-71
- 13 Kral A, Kronenberger WG, Pisoni DB, O'Donoghue GM. Neurocognitive factors in sensory restoration of early deafness: a connectome model. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15 (06) 610-621
- 14 Reitan R. Validity of the Trail Making test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Percept Mot Skills 1958; 8: 271-276
- 15 Harris MS, Kronenberger WG, Gao S, Hoen HM, Miyamoto RT, Pisoni DB. Verbal short-term memory development and spoken language outcomes in deaf children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (02) 179-192
- 16 Department of Health. Western Australia. Clinical guidelines for pediatric cochlear implantation. Perth: Health Networks Branch, Department of Health, Western Australia,; 2011
- 17 Sharma A, Campbell J. A sensitive period for cochlear implantation in deaf children. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2011; 24 (01, Suppl 1): 151-153
- 18 Turgeon C, Lazzouni L, Lepore F, Ellemberg D. An objective auditory measure to assess speech recognition in adult cochlear implant users. Clin Neurophysiol 2014; 125 (04) 827-835
- 19 Soliman S. Speech discrimination audiometry using Arabic phonetically-balanced words. Ain Shams Med J 1976; 27: 27-30
- 20 Fahmy SI, Nofal LM, Shehata SF, El Kady HM, Ibrahim HK. Updating indicators for scaling the socioeconomic level of families for health research. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 2015; 90 (01) 1-7
- 21 Zain D, Ismail N, Mekki S, Sallam Y. Outcomes of pediatric cochlear implantation contributing factors [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. El-Azhar University, 2018
- 22 Robbins AM, Renshaw JJ, Berry SW. Evaluating meaningful auditory integration in profoundly hearing-impaired children. Am J Otol 1991; 12 (Suppl): 144-150
- 23 Abou Hassibea A, El Sady S, Elshobary A. et al. Standardization, translation and modification of the preschool language scale-4 [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ain Shams University, 2011
- 24 Zimmerman I, Steiner V, Pond R. Preschool Language Scale-fourth edition, technical report. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp; 2002
- 25 Conway CM, Karpicke J, Anaya EM, Henning SC, Kronenberger WG, Pisoni DB. Nonverbal cognition in deaf children following cochlear implantation: motor sequencing disturbances mediate language delays. Dev Neuropsychol 2011; 36 (02) 237-254
- 26 Cosetti MK, Pinkston JB, Flores JM. et al. Neurocognitive testing and cochlear implantation: insights into performance in older adults. Clin Interv Aging 2016; 11: 603-613
- 27 Holt RF. Enhancing speech discrimination through stimulus repetition. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2011; 54 (05) 1431-1447
- 28 Cejas I, Mitchell CM, Hoffman M, Quittner AL. CdaCI Investigative Team. Comparisons of IQ in children with and without cochlear implants: Longitudinal findings and associations with language. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (06) 1187-1198
- 29 Hashemi SB, Monshizadeh L. The effect of cochlear implantation in development of intelligence quotient of 6-9 deaf children in comparison with normal hearing children (Iran, 2009-2011). Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2012; 76 (06) 802-804
- 30 Chen M, Wang Z, Zhang Z. et al. Intelligence development of pre-lingual deaf children with unilateral cochlear implantation. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 90: 264-269
- 31 Davidson LS, Geers AE, Hale S, Sommers MM, Brenner C, Spehar B. Effects of early auditory deprivation on working memory and reasoning abilities in verbal and visuospatial domains for pediatric cochlear implant recipients. Ear Hear 2019; 40 (03) 517-528
- 32 Grasel S, Greters M, Goffi-Gomez MVS. et al. P3 Cognitive Potential in Cochlear Implant Users. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 22 (04) 408-414
- 33 Edwards L, Khan S, Broxholme C, Langdon D. Exploration of the cognitive and behavioural consequences of paediatric cochlear implantation. Cochlear Implants Int 2006; 7 (02) 61-76
- 34 Pisoni DB, Kronenberger WG, Chandramouli SH, Conway CM. Learning and memory processes following cochlear implantation: The missing piece of the puzzle. Front Psychol 2016; 7: 493
- 35 Edwards LC. Children with cochlear implants and complex needs: a review of outcome research and psychological practice. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2007; 12 (03) 258-268
- 36 Marschark M. Psychological development of deaf children. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993
- 37 Giraud AL, Truy E, Frackowiak R. Imaging plasticity in cochlear implant patients. Audiol Neurotol 2001; 6 (06) 381-393
- 38 Proops DW, Donaldson I, Cooper HR. et al. Outcomes from adult implantation, the first 100 patients. J Laryngol Otol Suppl 1999; 24: 5-13
- 39 Hall ML, Eigsti IM, Bortfeld H, Lillo-Martin D. Executive Function in Deaf Children: Auditory Access and Language Access. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2018; 61 (08) 1970-1988
- 40 Holden LK, Finley CC, Firszt JB. et al. Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (03) 342-360
- 41 Vanaja CS, Sarda S. P300 as a measure of auditory memory in cochlear implant recipients: A preliminary report. Indian J Otol 2019; 25 (02) 103-107