Assessment of Receptive and Expressive Language Skills Among Young Children With Prelingual Single-Sided Deafness Managed With Early Cochlear Implantation.
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 08 2021
02 08 2021
Historique:
entrez:
25
8
2021
pubmed:
26
8
2021
medline:
11
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pediatric single-sided deafness (SSD) can seriously affect development, causing impaired spatial hearing skills, speech-language delays, and academic underachievement. Early cochlear implantation likely improves hearing-related outcomes, but its association with language development remains unclear. To investigate whether early cochlear implantation is associated with language outcomes for children with prelingual SSD. The Cochlear Implant for Children and One Deaf Ear study was initiated in 2015 and recruited participants at 4 academic hospitals in Flanders, Belgium, through 2019. This cohort study included 3 groups of children aged 2 to 5 years: children with SSD and a cochlear implant, children with SSD without a cochlear implant, and a control group with normal hearing. Language and hearing skills were assessed 1 to 2 times per year until the age of 10 years. Study completion rates were high (82%). Data analysis was performed from October to December 2020. Unilateral cochlear implant. Longitudinal vocabulary, grammar, and receptive language scores. The implanted group was hypothesized to outperform the nonimplanted group on all language tests. During the recruitment period, 47 children with prelingual SSD without additional disabilities were identified at the participating hospitals. Fifteen of the 34 children with an intact auditory nerve received a cochlear implant (44%, convenience sample). Sixteen of the remaining children were enrolled in the SSD control group (50%). Data from 61 children (mean [SD] age at the time of enrollment, 2.08 [1.34] years; 26 girls [42%]) were included in the analysis: 15 children with SSD and a cochlear implant, 16 children with SSD without a cochlear implant, and 30 children with normal hearing. Children with SSD and a cochlear implant performed in line with their peers with normal hearing with regard to grammar. In contrast, children with SSD without a cochlear implant had worse grammar scores than the group with implants (-0.76; 95% CI, -0.31 to -1.21; P = .004) and the group with normal hearing (-0.53; 95% CI, -0.91 to -0.15; P = .02). The 3 groups had similar vocabulary and receptive language abilities. These findings suggest that early cochlear implantation is associated with normal grammar development in young children with prelingual SSD. Although further follow-up will reveal the long-term outcomes of the cochlear implant for other skills, the current results will help clinicians and policy makers identify the best treatment option for these children.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34432009
pii: 2783479
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.22591
pmc: PMC8387851
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e2122591Références
Pediatrics. 2010 Jun;125(6):e1348-55
pubmed: 20457680
Laryngoscope. 2016 Mar;126(3):746-54
pubmed: 26452077
Ear Hear. 2020 May/Jun;41(3):678-685
pubmed: 31567563
Audiol Neurootol. 2015;20 Suppl 1:7-12
pubmed: 25998842
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Oct;39(9):e803-e809
pubmed: 30199498
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
Hear Res. 2019 Feb;372:42-51
pubmed: 29573881
Ear Hear. 2019 Nov/Dec;40(6):1293-1306
pubmed: 30870240
Sci Rep. 2017 Dec 4;7(1):16900
pubmed: 29203800
Lancet Neurol. 2016 May;15(6):610-21
pubmed: 26976647
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011 May;144(5):662-75
pubmed: 21493333
Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep. 2018;6(1):74-81
pubmed: 29651362
Clin Otolaryngol. 2019 Jul;44(4):671-676
pubmed: 31006171
Rev Med Virol. 2007 Sep-Oct;17(5):355-63
pubmed: 17542052
Audiol Neurootol. 2015;20 Suppl 1:31-7
pubmed: 25999162
Otol Neurotol. 2008 Apr;29(3):302-9
pubmed: 18317399
Clin Otolaryngol. 2017 Oct;42(5):979-987
pubmed: 28063244
Hear Res. 2019 Feb;372:29-41
pubmed: 29395617
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002 Jun;45(3):573-84
pubmed: 12069009
Audiol Neurootol. 2015;20 Suppl 1:21-30
pubmed: 25999052
Otol Neurotol. 2017 Aug;38(7):e195-e202
pubmed: 28570414
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018 Dec;115:156-164
pubmed: 30368378
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1999 Dec;42(6):1432-43
pubmed: 10599625
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Oct;157(4):572-579
pubmed: 28828919
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2014 Oct;78(10):1611-7
pubmed: 25081604
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Dec;37(10):1589-1595
pubmed: 27749751
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021 Jan 1;147(1):58-69
pubmed: 33151295
Pediatrics. 2017 Mar;139(3):
pubmed: 28209771
Otol Neurotol. 2015 Feb;36(2):209-19
pubmed: 25502451
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Mar 25;62(3):525-542
pubmed: 30950738
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 Sep;278(9):3245-3255
pubmed: 33079248
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 Jun 10;60(6):1551-1567
pubmed: 28547010
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 May 24;60(5):1362-1377
pubmed: 28418532
Otol Neurotol. 2017 Apr;38(4):496-503
pubmed: 28288475
N Engl J Med. 2006 May 18;354(20):2151-64
pubmed: 16707752
Trends Neurosci. 2012 Feb;35(2):111-22
pubmed: 22104561
N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 26;369(13):1190-3
pubmed: 24015974
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2020 Jan 8;51(1):84-97
pubmed: 31913803
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Jul;37(6):658-64
pubmed: 27153328
Otol Neurotol. 2017 Dec;38(10):e570-e576
pubmed: 29135879
J R Soc Interface. 2017 Sep;14(134):
pubmed: 28904005
Pediatrics. 2015 Jul;136(1):141-53
pubmed: 26055845
J Pediatr. 2016 May;172:110-115.e2
pubmed: 26858192