Measures of Comparative Behavior in Hearing Loss Patients with Cochlear Implant: Caretaker Assessment
- 4 Downloads
The aim of this study was to assess comparative behavior domain in patients with cochlear implants, using caretaker assessment. A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted. Of 106 patients with hearing loss and receiving cochlear implants were included along with their caretakers. The caretaker’ perspective questionnaire-22 was implemented covering emotions, education, and social relationships domain. A repeated measure ANOVA was used to statistical analysis. The implantation elicited a slight reduction in emotions scores domain as well as slight increase in social relationships scores from pre-cochlear implants to 12 months in all aged (6–10 years: − 10.7, 95%CI − 8.4 to 12.9; 4.2, 95%CI 3.0–5.5, 11–20 years: − 8.6, 95%CI − 6.7 to 10.5; 2.5, 95%CI 1.6–3.3, 21–59 years: − 6.8, 95%CI − 4.9 to 8.6; 2.0, 95%CI 1.3–2.7, and older 60 years: − 12.1, 95%CI − 9.5 to 14.6; 3.6, 95%CI 2.7–4.5, respectively). However, the education scores domain has slight increase only in aged 21–59 years group (1.8, 95%CI 0.7–2.8). A long-term after cochlear implants (12 months), but not after only 6 months elicits a statistically significant increase the social relationships scores and the reduction in negative emotions scores in all aged at implantation. However, the education scores have slight increase only in aged 21–59.
KeywordsCaretaker assessment Cochlear implant Emotions scores Education scores Social relationships scores
The authors are grateful to all the patients and families who kindly participated in this study. The strategic wisdom and research institute, and the research faculty of medicine, Srinakharinwirot University for their kindness supporting, time and assistance during the study. The authors wish to thank the MSMC in approval a grant to J.S.
JS wrote the proposal to apply a grant, designed the study, screened and examined all the recruited subjects, researched data, and reviewed the manuscript. KK Analyzed data and performed the statistical analysis and wrote the manuscript. Both of JS and KK are the guarantor of this work and, as such, had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
This study has received financial support from the MSMC (Grant Number 606/2015).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 5.Holden LK, Finley CC, Firszt JB, Holden TA, Brenner C, Potts LG, Gotter BD, Vanderhoof SS, Mispagel K, Heydebrand G, Skinner MW (2013) Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 34(3):342–360. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182741aa7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Hashemi SB, Monshizadeh L (2016) Comparison of auditory perception in cochlear implanted children with and without additional disabilities. Iran J Med Sci 41(3):186–190Google Scholar
- 10.Volleth N, Hast A, Lehmann EK, Hoppe U (2018) Subjective improvement of hearing through cochlear implantation. HNO 22(10):018–0529Google Scholar
- 15.StataCorp (2013) Stata statistical software. Release 13 edn. StataCorp LP, College StationGoogle Scholar
- 18.Mikic B, Miric D, Nikolic-Mikic M, Ostojic S, Asanovic M (2014) Age at implantation and auditory memory in cochlear implanted children. Cochlear Implants Int 15(1):000000000191Google Scholar