The advent of universal neonatal hearing screening in some countries and the availability of screening programs for at-risk infants in other countries has facilitated earlier referral, diagnosis, and intervention for infants with hearing loss. Improvements in device technology, two decades of pediatric clinical experience, a growing recognition of the efficacy of cochlear implants for young children, and the recent change in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's age criteria to include children as young as 12 mo has led to increasing numbers of young children receiving cochlear implants. Evidence to support provision for infants younger than 12 mo is extrapolated from physiological studies, studies of children using hearing aids, and studies of children older than 12 mo of age with implants. To date, however, there are few published research findings regarding communication development in children between 6 and 12 mo of age who receive implants. The current study hypothesized that earlier implantation would lead to increased rates of language acquisition as the children were still in the critical period for their development. A retrospective review was completed for 19 infants (mean age at implantation, 0.88 yr; range, 0.61-1.07, SD 0.15) and 87 toddlers (mean age at implantation, 1.60 yr; range, 1.13-2.00, SD 0.24) who received the multichannel implant in Melbourne, Australia. Preimplantation audiological assessments for these children included aided and unaided audiograms, auditory brain stem response, auditory steady state response (ASSR), and otoacoustic emission and indicated profound to total bilateral hearing loss in all cases. Communication assessment included completion of the Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale and educational psychologists' cognitive and motor assessment. Computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, and surgical records for all cases were reviewed. Postimplantation language assessments were reported in terms of the rate of growth over time on the language comprehension and language expression subscales of the Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale. Results demonstrated that cochlear implantation may be performed safely in very young children with excellent language outcomes. The mean rates of receptive (1.12) and expressive (1.01) language growth for children receiving implants before the age of 12 mo were significantly greater than the rates achieved by children receiving implants between 12 and 24 mo, and matched growth rates achieved by normally hearing peers. These preliminary results support the provision of cochlear implants for children younger than 12 mo of age within experienced pediatric implantation centers.

Objective Describe the long-term benefits of early cochlear implantation. Provide a comprehensive description of outcomes, including: language, speech production, and speech perception. Compare the communication outcomes for the early implanted children to those of normally hearing children and children who received a cochlear implant at a comparatively older age. Method Retrospective review of the communication development of 35 children implanted between 6 and 12 months of age and 85 children implanted between 13 and 24 months of age. Audiologic assessments included unaided and aided audiograms, auditory brainstem response (ABR), auditory steady state response (ASSR), and otoacoustic emissons (OAEs). Formal language, speech production, and speech perception measures were administered, preimplant and at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years postimplant. Results The children who received their cochlear implant by 12 months of age demonstrated language growth rates equivalent to their normally hearing peers and achieved age appropriate receptive language scores 3 years postimplant. The children who received their cochlear implant between 13 and 24 months demonstrated a significant language delay at 3 years postimplant. Speech production development followed a similar pattern to that of normal-hearing children, although was delayed, for both groups of children. Mean open-set speech perception scores were comparable with previous reports for children and adults who use cochlear implants. Conclusion Children implanted by 12 months of age demonstrate better language development compared with children who receive their cochlear implant between 13 and 24 months. This supports the provision of a cochlear implant within the first year of life to enhance the likelihood that a child with severe-to-profound hearing impairment will commence elementary school with age-appropriate language skills.

The first cochlear implants were used to provide postlinguistically deafened adults with increased awareness of environmental sound and the suprasegmental features of speech to aid lipreading.1 Rapid development in the field resulted in audition-alone speech understanding for adults with acquired loss.2,3 Following these early successes with adults, interest shifted to the pediatric population who obtained little or no benefit from existing hearing aids.4,5 The efficacy of multichannel cochlear implants for children with profound hearing loss has been well established, in terms of speech perception benefit,6-12 language acquisition rates,13-15 and speech production/intelligibility improvements.16-19 Published research is now able to define the variables leading to optimum speech perception and language outcomes for children using the cochlear implant, such as younger age at implantation,20-27 use of the most current speech processor technology,28 a communication mode emphasizing an aural/oral approach,10,29,30 absence of a developmental delay,12,31-33 shorter duration of profound hearing loss,34 and preimplant residual hearing.35-37 Based on outcomes and comparisons with hearing aid users, the application of implants has broadened to include children with a pure-tone average (PTA) in the range of 82 to 98 dB HL (hearing level).34,36,38 Examination of the speech perception performance for hearing aid users suggests that children using the cochlear implant have an equivalent level of hearing to children within the severe hearing range.39-43

The aim of this study was to develop guidelines, based on the unaided pure-tone audiogram, for recommending a cochlear implant (CI) for infants and young children with residual hearing. As awareness of the benefits of early implantation increases and age at diagnosis decreases, an increasing number of infants are presenting for consideration of implantation with significant residual hearing in one or both ears. Determining the likelihood that these infants will have an improved speech and language outcome if they receive a CI is a challenge. Subjects were 142 hearing impaired children (ages 4.6 to 16.2 yrs) with unaided three-frequency pure-tone average (PTA; at 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz) ranging from 28 to 125 dB HL: 62 used conventional amplification (analog or digital hearing aids [HAs]) and the remaining 80 used a Nucleus 24 (N24) or Freedom CI. Open-set monosyllabic word (Phonetically Balanced Kindergarten or Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant words) and sentence (Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentences) testing was administered audition alone to both groups of children. Comparison of means for sentence testing showed that the children using CIs performed significantly better than their peers with profound hearing loss (PTA >90 dB HL) using HAs and not significantly differently to those with severe (PTA 66 to 90 dB HL) or moderate (PTA <66 dB HL) hearing loss. Comparison of means for monosyllabic word testing showed that the children using CIs performed significantly better than their peers with severe and profound hearing loss and not significantly differently to those with moderate hearing loss. Regression analysis was used to determine the equivalent unaided PTA values that corresponded to the median and first quartile scores for the children using CIs on speech perception testing. For open-set words, scored for phonemes correct, the equivalent unaided PTAs were 46 and 56 dB HL, respectively. For sentence testing, the equivalent unaided PTAs were 63 and 72 dB HL, respectively. Results suggest that recommendation for implantation can be made confidently for children presenting with bilateral profound hearing loss. For children with unaided PTA hearing levels in the range of 75 to 90 dB HL, a recommendation for implantation can also be made, provided that a 75% chance of improvement in hearing outcome is an acceptable level of benefit to the family and clinician. Children presenting with PTA hearing levels better than 75 dB HL should be encouraged to continue with binaural HA use.

The aims of this study were to (a) compare language outcomes in pediatric cochlear implant users enrolled in three different communication programs: sign and spoken language, auditory-oral, and auditory-verbal therapy, and (b) examine factors influencing language outcomes. Post-implant standard scores on language assessments of receptive vocabulary, auditory comprehension, and expressive communication were collected from files of 42 children with prelingual hearing loss who were implanted by 3;6 years of age. Early intervention history, device details, and demographic information were obtained for each child. Family involvement was evaluated using a rating scale. After adjusting for potential covariates, there were no significant differences in language outcomes across the three groups. Overall, there was a large degree of variability with some children achieving below average scores and others achieving above average scores. Age at diagnosis of hearing loss and family involvement were significantly associated with language outcomes. Regardless of the type of communication approach received, children diagnosed with hearing loss at an early age and children with a high level of family involvement had better post-implant language scores than children diagnosed later and with lower levels of family involvement. These findings emphasize the importance of early diagnosis and highlight the contribution families make to the language outcomes of children with cochlear implants.

The relative impact of early intervention approach on speech perception and language skills was examined in these 3 well-matched groups of children using cochlear implants. Eight children from an auditory verbal intervention program were identified. From a pediatric database, researchers blind to the outcome data, identified 23 children from auditory oral programs and 8 children from bilingual-bicultural programs with the same inclusion criteria and equivalent demographic factors. All child participants were male, had congenital profound hearing loss (pure tone average >80 dBHL), no additional disabilities, were within the normal IQ range, were monolingual English speakers, had no unusual findings on computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging, and received hearing aids and cochlear implants at a similar age and before 4 years of age. Open-set speech perception (consonant-nucleus-consonant [CNC] words and Bamford-Kowal-Bench [BKB] sentences) and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) were administered. The mean age at cochlear implant was 1.7 years (range, 0.8-3.9; SD, 0.7), mean test age was 5.4 years (range, 2.5-10.1; SD, 1.7), and mean device experience was 3.7 years (range, 0.7-7.9; SD, 1.8). Results indicate mean CNC scores of 60%, 43%, and 24% and BKB scores of 77%, 77%, and 56% for the auditory-verbal (AV), aural-oral (AO), and bilingual-bicultural (BB) groups, respectively. The mean PPVT delay was 13, 19, and 26 months for AV, AO, and BB groups, respectively. Despite equivalent child demographic characteristics at the outset of this study, by 3 years postimplant, there were significant differences in AV, AO, and BB groups. Results support consistent emphasis on oral/aural input to achieve optimum spoken communication outcomes for children using cochlear implants.