English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The present study was designed to evaluate the effect of neural response telemetry (NRT)-based cochlear implant (CI) programming versus behavioral-based programming on electrical stimulation parameters (MAP) threshold (T) and comfortable (C) levels and speech perception abilities in young children, during the first year of implant use. Ten congenitally deaf children at the age of 12-39 months (mean age: 25.2 months) implanted with the Nucleus 24R(CS) CI participated in the study. The group was randomly divided into two: (1) NRT-based MAP group (n = 5) consisted of children who were programmed using intra-operative NRT measurements; (2) behavioral-based MAP group (n = 5) consisted of children who were programmed using the behavioral responses of the patients. MAP parameters as well as sound-field aided thresholds and speech perception abilities were compared between the two groups at consecutive programming sessions: 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post initial stimulation. Results indicated no significant differences among NRT-based MAPs and behavioral-based MAPs. Although MAP profiles at initial stimulation differed in the apical region, these differences decreased with time. In addition, a gradual increase of T and C levels of NRT-based MAPs as well as those of behavioral-based MAPs was evident until the 1-month time point, thereafter stabilization occurred. Sound-field aided thresholds improved with time for both groups; however, they were found to be significantly better for the NRT-based MAP group. Despite these differences, speech perception abilities were comparable among groups at 12 months post initial stimulation. NRT-based programming was found to be significantly shorter than behavioral-based programming. In conclusion, for this small group of children, our findings support the use of NRT for programming of young children during the initial period after implantation.

NRT-BASED VERSUS BEHAVIORAL-BASED MAP: A COMPARISON OF PARAMETERS AND SPEECH PERCEPTION IN YOUNG CHILDREN