Louis Peeraer

Predictors of Spoken Language Development Following Pediatric Cochlear Implantation

Objectives: Although deaf children with cochlear implants (CIs) are able to develop good language skills, the large variability in outcomes remains a significant concern. The first aim of this study was to evaluate language skills in children with CIs to establish benchmarks. The second aim was to make an estimation of the optimal age at implantation to provide maximal opportunities for the child to achieve good language skills afterward. The third aim was to gain more insight into the causes of variability to set recommendations for optimizing the rehabilitation process of prelingually deaf children with CIs. Design: Receptive and expressive language development of 288 children who received CIs by age five was analyzed in a retrospective multicenter study. Outcome measures were language quotients (LQs) on the Reynell Developmental Language Scales and Schlichting Expressive Language Test at 1, 2, and 3 years after implantation. Independent predictive variables were nine child-related, environmental, and auditory factors. A series of multiple regression analyses determined the amount of variance in expressive and receptive language outcomes attributable to each predictor when controlling for the other variables. Results: Simple linear regressions with age at first fitting and independent samples t tests demonstrated that children implanted before the age of two performed significantly better on all tests than children who were implanted at an older age. The mean LQ was 0.78 with an SD of 0.18. A child with an LQ lower than 0.60 (= 0.78−0.18) within 3 years after implantation was labeled as a weak performer compared with other deaf children implanted before the age of two. Contralateral stimulation with a second CI or a hearing aid and the absence of additional disabilities were related to better language outcomes. The effect of environmental factors, comprising multilingualism, parental involvement, and communication mode increased over time. Three years after implantation, the total multiple regression model accounted for 52% of the variance in receptive language scores and 58% of the variance in expressive language scores. Conclusions: On the basis of language test scores of this large group of children, an LQ of 0.60 or lower was considered a risk criterion for problematic language development compared with other deaf children using CIs. Children attaining LQs below 0.60 should be monitored more closely and perhaps their rehabilitation programs should be reconsidered. Improved language outcomes were related to implantation under the age of two, contralateral stimulation, monolingualism, sufficient involvement of the parents, and oral communication by the parents. The presence of an additional learning disability had a negative influence on language development. Understanding these causes of variation can help clinicians and parents to create the best possible circumstances for children with CIs to acquire language.

Effect of Pediatric Bilateral Cochlear Implantation on Language Development

OBJECTIVE To examine spoken language outcomes in children undergoing bilateral cochlear implantation compared with matched peers undergoing unilateral implantation. DESIGN Case-control, frequency-matched, retrospective cross-sectional multicenter study. SETTING Two Belgian and 3 Dutch cochlear implantation centers. PARTICIPANTS Twenty-five children with 1 cochlear implant matched with 25 children with 2 cochlear implants selected from a retrospective sample of 288 children who underwent cochlear implantation before 5 years of age. INTERVENTION Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Performance on measures of spoken language comprehension and expression (Reynell Developmental Language Scales and Schlichting Expressive Language Test). RESULTS On the receptive language tests (mean difference [95% CI], 9.4 [0.3-18.6]) and expressive language tests (15.7 [5.9-25.4] and 9.7 [1.5-17.9]), children undergoing bilateral implantation performed significantly better than those undergoing unilateral implantation. Because the 2 groups were matched with great care on 10 auditory, child, and environmental factors, the difference in performance can be mainly attributed to the bilateral implantation. A shorter interval between both implantations was related to higher standard scores. Children undergoing 2 simultaneous cochlear implantations performed better on the expressive Word Development Test than did children undergoing 2 sequential cochlear implantations. CONCLUSIONS The use of bilateral cochlear implants is associated with better spoken language learning. The interval between the first and second implantation correlates negatively with language scores. On expressive language development, we find an advantage for simultaneous compared with sequential implantation.

Expressive Vocabulary, Morphology, Syntax and Narrative Skills in Profoundly Deaf Children after Early Cochlear Implantation.

Practical experience and research reveal generic spoken language benefits after cochlear implantation. However, systematic research on specific language domains and error analyses are required to probe sub-skills. Moreover, the effect of predictive factors on distinct language domains is unknown. In this study, outcomes of 70 school-aged children with cochlear implants were compared with hearing peers. Approximately half of the children with cochlear implants achieved age-adequate language levels. Results did not reveal systematic strong or weak language domains. Error analyses showed difficulties with morphological and syntactic rules and inefficient narrative skills. Children without additional disabilities who received early intervention were raised with one spoken language, and used a second cochlear implant or contralateral hearing aid were more likely to present good language skills.

Narrative spoken language skills in severely hearing impaired school-aged children with cochlear implants

Cochlear implants have a significant positive effect on spoken language development in severely hearing impaired children. Previous work in this population has focused mostly on the emergence of early-developing language skills, such as vocabulary. The current study aims at comparing narratives, which are more complex and later-developing spoken language skills, of a contemporary group of profoundly deaf school-aged children using cochlear implants (n=66, median age=8 years 3 months) with matched normal hearing peers. Results show that children with cochlear implants demonstrate good results on quantity and coherence of the utterances, but problematic outcomes on quality, content and efficiency of retold stories. However, for a subgroup (n=20, median age=8 years 1 month) of deaf children without additional disabilities who receive cochlear implantation before the age of 2 years, use two implants, and are raised with one spoken language, age-adequate spoken narrative skills at school-age are feasible. This is the first study to set the goals regarding spoken narrative skills for deaf children using cochlear implants.