A longitudinal study of electrical stimulation levels and electrode impedance in children using the Clarion cochlear implant

Acta Oto-Laryngologica

Volumn 126, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 581-586

  Henkin, Yael ^a,b   Kaplan Neeman, Ricky ^a,b   Kronenberg, Jona ^b   Migirov, Lela ^b   Hildesheimer, Minka ^a,b   Muchnik, Chava ^a,b  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b SHEBA MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

Children; Clarion cochlear implant; Comfortable (M) levels; Dynamic range; Electrode impedance; Threshold (T) levels

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CHILD; CHILDHOOD DISEASE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; ELECTRODE; ELECTROSTIMULATION; EVALUATION RESEARCH; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION;

ADOLESCENT; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COCHLEA; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; DEAFNESS; ELECTRIC IMPEDANCE; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INFANT; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MALE; PITCH PERCEPTION; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; SOFTWARE;

EID: 33745685477     PISSN: 00016489     EISSN: 16512553     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00016480500443391     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Hughes ML, Vander Werff KR, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Kelsay DMR, Teagle HFB, et al. A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in Nucleus 24 cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 2001;22:471-86.
2. Overstreet EH, Belagaje SR, Kirk KI, Lormore K, Wang K, Zwolen TA. Analysis of programming levels as a possible outcome predictor: a cross-device study of pediatric and adult cochlear implant users. Poster presented at the Conference for Implantable Prostheses, Asilomar, CA, USA, August 2003.
3. Henkin Y, Kaplan-Neeman R, Muchnik C, Kronenberg J, Hildesheimer M. Changes over time in the psycho-electric parameters in children with cochlear implants. Int J Aud 2003;42:274-8.
4. Henkin Y, Kaplan-Neeman R, Muchnik C, Kronenberg J, Hildesheimer M. Changes over time in thresholds, comfortable levels, and impedance in children using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2003;67:873-80.
5. Brown CJ, Hughes ML, Luk B, Abbas PJ, Wolaver A, Gervais J. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the Nucleus 24 speech processor: data from adults. Ear Hear 2000;21:151-63.
6. Hughes ML, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Wolaver AA, Gervais JP. Comparison of EAP thresholds with MAP levels in the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant: data from children. Ear Hear 2000;21:164-74.
7. Thai-Van H, Truy E, Charasse B, Boutitie F, Chanal JM, Cochard N, et al. Modeling the relationship between psychophysical perception and electrically evoked compound action potential threshold in young cochlear implant recipients: clinical implications for implant fitting. Clin Neurophysiol 2004;115:2811-24.
8. Brown CJ, Hughes ML, Lopez SM, Abbas PJ. Relationship between EABR thresholds and levels used to program the CLARION speech processor. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 1999;177:50-7.
9. Truy E, Gallego S, Chanal JM, Collet L, Morgon A. Correlation between electrical auditory brainstem response and perceptual thresholds in Digisonic cochlear implant users. Laryngoscope 1998;108:554-9.
10. Bresnihan M, Norman G, Scott F, Viani L. Measurement of comfort levels by means of electrical stapedial reflex in children. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;127:963-6.
11. Thai-Van H, Chanal JM, Coudert C, Veuillet E, Truy E, Collet L. Relationship between NRT measurements and behavioral levels in children with the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant may change over time: preliminary report. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2001;58:153-62.
12. Franck KH. A model of a Nucleus 24 cochlear implant fitting protocol based on the electrically evoked whole nerve action potential. Ear Hear 2002;23:67S-71S.
13. Shapiro W, Walzman S. Changes in electrical thresholds over time in young children implanted with the Nucleus cochlear prosthesis. In: Clark GM, Cowan RSC, eds. International Cochlear Implant, Speech and Hearing Symposium - Melbourne. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1995;104:177-8.
14. Kubo T, Iwaki T, Ohkusa M, Doi K, Uno A, Yamamoto K, et al. Auditory plasticity in cochlear implant patients. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1996;116:224-7.
15. Butts SL, Hodges AV, Dolan-Ash S, Balkany TJ. Changes in stimulation levels over time in Nucleus 22 cochlear implant users. In: Gantz GJ, Tyler RS, Rubinstein JT, eds. 7th Symposium on Cochlear Implants in Children. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 2000;109(S185):53-6.
16. Swanson B, Seligman P, Carter P. Impedance measurement of the nucleus 22-electrode array in patients. In: Clark GM, Cowan RSC, eds. International Cochlear Implant, Speech and Hearing Symposium - Melbourne. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1995;104:141-4.
17. Busby PA, Plant KL, Whitford LA. Electrode impedance in adults and children using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Cochlear Implants International 2002;3:87-103.
18. Dorman MF, Smith LM, Dankowski K, McCandless G, Parkin JL. Long term measures of electrode impedance and auditory thresholds in the Ineraid cochlear implant. J Speech Hear Res 1992;35:1126-30.
19. Kawano A, Seldon HL, Clark GM, Ramsden RT, Raine CH. Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1998;118:313-26.
20. Miller AL, Morris DJ, Pfingst BE. Effects of time after deafening and implantation on guinea pig electrical detection thresholds. Hear Res 2000;144:175-86.
21. Xu J, Shepherd RK, Millard RE, Clark GM. Chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve at high stimulus rates: a physiological and histopathological study. Hear Res 1997;105:1-29.
22. Pfingst BE, Morris DJ, Miller AL. Effects of electrode configuration on threshold functions for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 1995;85:76-84.
23. McKay CM, Remine MD, McDermott HJ. Loudness summation for pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea: effects of rate, electrode separation, level, and mode of stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 2001;110:1514-24.
24. Geier LL, Norton SJ. The effects of limiting the number of Nucleus 22 cochlear implant electrodes programmed on speech perception. Ear Hear 1992;13:340-8.