ABSTRACT
Abstract Introduction Parental support is important in the habilitation/rehabilitation of children using cochlear implant devices. Hence, it is important for families to know the realistic expectations regarding outcomes from CIs. Objective The objective of the present study is to know the parents' expectation from children using CIs. Methods For this study, we recruited 23 parents of children using CIs. We administered 15 questions translated in to Hindi related to communication abilities, social skills, academic achievement, change in future life, rehabilitation demand, and stress due to hearing impairment. Results The response of the questions (5-point rating scale) related to communication abilities showed that parents were expecting children using CIs to use the telephone (95%), to be able to detect soft sounds (99%), to listen in crowds (86%), to be able to easily understand others (76%), and to show improvement in communication skills (78%). Similarly, for questions related to social skills showed 90% of the parents expecting that their children with CIs should be able to easily make friends with normal hearing peers, and 80% of the parents were expecting the children to achieve high standards in their reading and writing skills. Questions related to change in future life showed 86% of the parents expecting their children with CIs to act like normal hearing children. Further, 78% parents showed positive response regarding importance of intensive training. However, 70% of the parents reported stress in the family due to the existence of the hearing impaired child. Conclusion Overall, the existing questionnaire-based study showed that parents have high expectations from their children with cochlear implant.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Introduction "Diabetes mellitus is a group of metabolic disorders characterized by elevated blood sugar and abnormalities in insulin secretion and action" ( American Diabetes Association). Previous literature has reported connection between diabetes mellitus and hearing impairment. There is a dearth of literature on auditory temporal resolution ability in individuals with diabetes mellitus type 2. Objective The main objective of the present study was to assess auditory temporal resolution ability through GDT (Gap Detection Threshold) in individuals with diabetes mellitus type 2 with high frequency hearing loss. Methods Fifteen subjects with diabetes mellitus type 2 with high frequency hearing loss in the age range of 30 to 40 years participated in the study as the experimental group. Fifteen age-matched non-diabetic individuals with normal hearing served as the control group. We administered the Gap Detection Threshold (GDT) test to all participants to assess their temporal resolution ability. Result We used the independent t-test to compare between groups. Results showed that the diabetic group (experimental) performed significantly poorer compared with the non-diabetic group ( control ). Conclusion It is possible to conclude that widening of auditory filters and changes in the central auditory nervous system contributed to poorer performance for temporal resolution task (Gap Detection Threshold) in individuals with diabetes mellitus type 2. Findings of the present study revealed the deteriorating effect of diabetes mellitus type 2 at the central auditory processing level.
ABSTRACT
Background: Aim of the study was to compare the speed of response, false-alarm rate, and subject preference of different response methods i.e. raising a hand, using response switch, and oral response mode for measuring pure-tone thresholds. Methods: Forty five participants (female-21 and 24 male) were included in the study with sensorineural hearing loss of various degree. Response method order was randomly assigned to 3 different sessions. Air-conduction thresholds were measured thrice for each participant in octave intervals between 250 Hz and 8000 Hz. The 2nd and 3rd session were performed for different response method on a different day but within 2 weeks of the 1st session. Results: Difference in the time was noted when compared with the extent of time required to complete the test for each response method. On an average, using the pushbutton method took 3.02 to 3.42 minutes less than using hand-raise or verbal response methods. There was also a significant participant preference for using the response button. No significant difference between response method for threshold level and number of false positives (P = 0.15) was found. Conclusion: This study supports the use of the response button when measuring auditory thresholds for sensorineural hearing loss.