Audiometric thresholds and speech perception evaluation in elderly patients wearing cochlear implants

Authors

  • Mariana D. C. Ferreira Santos ENT Doctor, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Alexandre Caixeta Guimarães ENT Doctor, MD, Otologist, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Henrique Furlan Pauna ENT Doctor, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Silvia Baddur Curi Audiologist, Cochlear Implant Specialist, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Daniele Jerônymo Audiologist, Cochlear Implant Specialist, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Walter Adriano Bianchini ENT Doctor, MD, Otologist, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Paulo Catanhede Porto ENT Doctor, MD, Otologist, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Agrício Nubiato Crespo Audiologist, Cochlear Implant Specialist, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil
  • Guilherme Machado de Carvalho ENT Doctor, MD, Otologist, UNICAMP - São Paulo, Brazil

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34631/sporl.579

Keywords:

cochlear implants, elderly, audiometric thresholds

Abstract

Objective: To compare the mean audiometric thresholds and the results of the speech perception test (SPT), between two groups with bilateral post-lingual severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss.

Material and Methods: A retrospective and analytical study, which compared the audiometric thresholds of 50 patients (under 60 and above 60 years old) implanted between May / 2002 and February / 2007.

Results: First group included 42 patients with a mean age of 44.6 years. The audiometric average threshold value was 26.98 dB, and the average value of the SPT was 88%.The second group included 8 patients, with a mean age of 66.7 years. This group had a mean audiometric threshold of 27.26 dB and the average value of SPT was 76.25%. No differences were observed between the audiometric threshold and the SPT of the two groups (p> 0.05).

Conclusion: The average audiometric thresholds and SPT are no different when comparing both groups.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bevilaqua MC, Costa OAF, Moret ALM, Amantini RBC. Implante coclear em crianças. In: Campos CAH, Costa HO (Eds.) Tratado de Otorrinolaringologia SBORL, São Paulo, Editora Roca; 2002:pp268-75.

Bevilaqua MC, Costa OAF, Moret ALM, Amantini RBC. Implante coclear em adultos. In: Campos CAH, Costa HO (Eds.) Tratado de Otorrinolaringologia SBORL, São Paulo, Editora Roca; 2002:pp276-89.

Porto PRC. Avaliação de resultados de implante coclear em pacientes deficientes auditivos, secundário à meningite. Dissertação de mestrado à pós-graduação na Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Universidade Estadual de Campinas em Ciências Médicas na área de Otorrinolaringologia. 2002.

Mangabeira Albenaz PL. Implantes cocleares. Parte I. RBM–ORL. 1995;2(6):119-22.

Luxford W, Brackmann D. The history of cochlear implants. The Surgeon´s workshop Handouts, Cochlear Corporation. 1994.

Summerfield AQ, Barton GR, Toner J, McAnallen C et al. Selfreported benefits from successive bilateral cochlear implantation in post-lingually deafened adults: randomised controlled trial. Int J Audiol. 2006;45 Suppl 1:S99-107.

Mo B, Lindbaek M, Harris S. Cochlear implants and quality of life: a prospective study. Ear Hear. 2005;26(2):186-94.

Chatelin V, Kim EJ, Driscoll C, Larky J et al. Cochlear implant outcomes in the elderly. Otol Neurotol. 2004;25(3):298-301.

Pasanisi E, Bacciu A, Vincenti V, Guida M et al. Speech recognition in elderly cochlear implant recipients. Clin Otolaringol 2003;28:154-7.

Indicadores e Dados Básicos, Brasil – 2012 / IDB – 2012. Ministério da Saúde. Disponível em http://tabnet.datasus.gov.br/cgi/idb2012/matriz.htm#demog (consultado em 25/06/2105).

Carvalho A. I Semana Nacional de Prevenção da Surdez. Prevenir é Ouvir. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1997;1(3):1.

Bilton T, Ramos LR, Ebel S, Teixeira LS et al. Prevalência da deficiência auditiva em uma população idosa. Mundo Saúde. 1997;21(4):218-25.

Rozenfeld S. Reações adversas aos medicamentos em idosos: as quedas em mulheres como iatrogenia farmacoterapêutica [Dissertação]. Rio de Janeiro (RJ): Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro; 1997.

Viude A. Fatores associados à presbiacusia em idosos. [Dissertação]. São Paulo (SP): Universidade de São Paulo; 2002.

O estatuto do idoso. Certificados digitais, Serasa. Titulo I artigo 1º, 2004.

Orabi AA, Mawman D, Al-Zoubi F, Saeed SR et al. Cochlear implant outcomes and quality of life in the elderly: Manchester experience over 13 years. Clin Otolaryngol. 2006;31(2):116-22.

Vermeire K, Brokx JP, Wuyts FL, Cochet E et al. Quality-of-life benefit from cochlear implantation in the elderly. Otol Neurotol. 2005;26(2):188-95.

Carvalho GM, Guimarães AC, Macedo ISC, Onuki LCB et al. Digisonic SP® Binaural cochlear implant: the coronal tunneled approach. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;79(3):298-305.

Tefili D, Barrault GFG, Ferreira AA, Cordioli JA et al. Implantes cocleares: aspectos tecnológicos e papel socioeconomico. Braz J Biom Eng. 2013;29(4):414-33.

Mosnier I, Bebear JP, Marx M, Fraysse B et al. Improvement of Cognitive Function After Cochlear Implantation in Elderly Patients. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;141(5):442-50.

Lin FR, Chien WW, Li L, Clarrett DM, Niparko JK, Francis HW. Cochlear Implantation in Older Adults. Medicine. 2012;91(5):229-41.

Downloads

How to Cite

D. C. Ferreira Santos, M., Caixeta Guimarães, A., Furlan Pauna, H., Baddur Curi, S., Jerônymo, D., Bianchini, W. A., Catanhede Porto, P., Nubiato Crespo, A., & Machado de Carvalho, G. (2015). Audiometric thresholds and speech perception evaluation in elderly patients wearing cochlear implants. Portuguese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, 53(2), 77–80. https://doi.org/10.34631/sporl.579

Issue

Vol. 53 No. 2 (2015): Junho

Section

Original Article