3.9 Article

Parents' View on Quality of Life after Cochlear Implantation in Children with Auditory Neuropathy

Journal

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ADVANCED OTOLOGY
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 338-344

Publisher

AVES
DOI: 10.5152/iao.2019.6103

Keywords

Auditory neuropathy; cochlear implantation; quality of life; satisfaction; listening skill

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of life in pediatric patients with auditory neuropathy according to the perspective of their parents after cochlear implantation. MATERIALS and METHODS: The pediatric patients, who underwent cochlear implantation with the diagnosis of auditory neuropathy at Izmir Bozyaka Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic between January 1997 and May 2017, were included to the study. Parents' Perspective tonnaire developed by Nottingham Pediatric Cochlear Implant Programme was used in the study. The questionnaire was composed of 11 subscales and 58 questions in total. RESULTS: The study included 26 pediatric patients (14 female, 12 male) who used cochlear implant for at least 1 year. The mean age of patients was 10.91 +/- 3.85(4.3-17.3 years old) and implantation age varied between 14 months and 80 months. (median; 35.65 +/- 20.03 months). Patients who attended school had more self-confidence, and also those having implant use over 6 years had a better self confidence and social relationship. CONCLUSION: Cochlear implantation not only improves the ability of hearing but also provides development of speech and language skills and therefore enhancing the patient's quality of life. From the perspective of parents, the use of cochlear implant in the children with auditory neuropathy improves the quality of life in many different ways. The perspective of parents can provide a multidimensional evaluation about the child's progress, therefore, it should be taken into consideration by the staff in implant centers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available