Hearing Handicap Ratings Among Different Profiles of Adult Cochlear Implant Users

Title
Hearing Handicap Ratings Among Different Profiles of Adult Cochlear Implant Users
Publication Date
2008
Author(s)
Noble, William Glass
Tyler, Richard
Dunn, Camille
Bhullar, Navjot
( author )
OrcID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1616-6094
Email: nbhulla2@une.edu.au
UNE Id une-id:nbhulla2
Type of document
Journal Article
Language
en
Entity Type
Publication
Publisher
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Place of publication
United States of America
UNE publication id
une:3585
Abstract
Objective: The aim was to compare outcomes in the domain of self-reported hearing handicap across groups of patients fit with one versus two cochlear implants (CI, CI + CI), or with an implant and a hearing aid (HA) in the nonimplanted ear (CI + HA). Design: The design was retrospective, and a preliminary step was to factor analyze the two measures used, namely, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE) and the Hearing Handicap Questionnaire (HHQ). Longer versus shorter-term experience with a single implant profile was compared, and further analysis confined to patients fit for less than 100 mo across the three profiles. Pre- versus postimplant self-report and performance (speech test, localization) data were also compared. Results: Three factors were identified in the HHIE, labeled Emotional Distress (HHIE), Difficulty in Hearing, and Social Restriction (HHIE). Highest handicap score for Emotional Distress (HHIE) was observed in the CI + HA group. There were significantly lower scores for Difficulty in Hearing in the CI + CI group than in the CI (p = 0.02) or CI + HA (p = 0.001) groups. On the Social Restriction (HHIE) subscale, the CI + CI group reported significantly lower rating than the CI (p = 0.009) or CI + HA (p = 0.006) groups. Two factors were identified in the HHQ, labeled Emotional Distress (HHQ) and Social Restriction (HHQ). Significantly higher Emotional Distress (HHQ) score was observed in the CI + HA group than in the CI + CI group (p = 0.002); significantly lower Social Restriction (HHQ) score was found in the CI + CI group than in the CI (p = 0.02) or CI + HA (p < 0.001) groups. Pre-post speech test performance showed least contrast in the CI + HA group. Conclusions: Outcomes demonstrate an evident reduction from single or bilateral implantation in the area of emotional distress and a further advantage from bilateral implantation in the areas of hearing difficulty and social restriction.
Link
Citation
Ear and Hearing, 29(1), p. 112-120
ISSN
1538-4667
0196-0202
Start page
112
End page
120

Files:

NameSizeformatDescriptionLink