These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Parents' views on the quality of life of their children 2-3 years after cochlear implantation.
    Author: Huttunen K, Rimmanen S, Vikman S, Virokannas N, Sorri M, Archbold S, Lutman ME.
    Journal: Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2009 Dec; 73(12):1786-94. PubMed ID: 19875180.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Cochlear implants for children are known to have impact on the lives of recipients and their families in a variety of ways. To obtain a clearer picture of these benefits, we explored the quality of life of 36 Finnish children and their families 2-3 years after unilateral cochlear implantation. METHODS: The studied children were, on average 5 years old, and had received their implant at the median age of 2 years:5 months (range 1:6 to 12:3). Most (67%) of the children used speech, eight (22%) used speech and signs, and four (11%) used sign language as their main communication mode. A third of the children had concomitant problems in addition to their profound hearing impairment. A validated closed-set questionnaire "Children with cochlear implants: parental perspectives" (available, e.g., at http://www.earfoundation.org.uk/research/questionnaires.html) was used to find out parents' views and experiences on implantation and explore life after it. RESULTS: Parents were most satisfied with improved/expanded social relations, improved communication (the development of spoken language), general functioning with the help of hearing and improved self-reliance of the child. Benefit of cochlear implantation was also detected with the Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP), which was concordant with views of the parents on the progress of their child in the areas of communication and education. When deciding on implantation, the parents particularly expected auditory information to enhance their child's safety in traffic, joining socially the hearing world, and better employment prospects as adults. Concerning the process of implantation, parents especially valued the know-how and fluent services of the implant centre, positive attitude within the family and information received from other families during the time they were considering the implant decision. Parents also found it important that they have the possibility to influence the communication mode that is used in their child's educational setting. CONCLUSIONS: Parents report that cochlear implants affect their children in a wide variety of ways that cannot be summarized by a single scale. A broader descriptive framework is required to capture their experiences adequately.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]