Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 13, 2026
Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages
Published on: March 24, 2023
Communication outcomes for groups of children using cochlear implants enrolled in auditory-verbal, aural-oral, and
Shani Dettman1, Elizabeth Wall, Gabriella Constantinescu
1The University of Melbourne Audiology, Hearing and Speech Sciences 550 Swanston St, Parkville, 3010, Victoria, Australia. dettmans@unimelb.edu.au
Objective:
The relative impact of early intervention approach on speech perception and language skills was examined in these 3 well-matched groups of children using cochlear implants.
Study Design:
Eight children from an auditory verbal intervention program were identified. From a pediatric database, researchers blind to the outcome data, identified 23 children from auditory oral programs and 8 children from bilingual-bicultural programs with the same inclusion criteria and equivalent demographic factors.
Patients:
All child participants were male, had congenital profound hearing loss (pure tone average >80 dBHL), no additional disabilities, were within the normal IQ range, were monolingual English speakers, had no unusual findings on computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging, and received hearing aids and cochlear implants at a similar age and before 4 years of age.
Main Outcome Measures:
Open-set speech perception (consonant-nucleus-consonant [CNC] words and Bamford-Kowal-Bench [BKB] sentences) and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) were administered.
Results:
The mean age at cochlear implant was 1.7 years (range, 0.8-3.9; SD, 0.7), mean test age was 5.4 years (range, 2.5-10.1; SD, 1.7), and mean device experience was 3.7 years (range, 0.7-7.9; SD, 1.8). Results indicate mean CNC scores of 60%, 43%, and 24% and BKB scores of 77%, 77%, and 56% for the auditory-verbal (AV), aural-oral (AO), and bilingual-bicultural (BB) groups, respectively. The mean PPVT delay was 13, 19, and 26 months for AV, AO, and BB groups, respectively.
Conclusion:
Despite equivalent child demographic characteristics at the outset of this study, by 3 years postimplant, there were significant differences in AV, AO, and BB groups. Results support consistent emphasis on oral/aural input to achieve optimum spoken communication outcomes for children using cochlear implants.
