NIH consensus conference. Cochlear implants in adults and children

OBJECTIVE--To provide clinicians and other health care providers with a current consensus on the benefits, limitations, and technical and safety issues that need to be considered in the use of cochlear implants. PARTICIPANTS--A nonfederal, nonadvocate, 14-member consensus panel representing the fields of otolaryngology, audiology, speech-language pathology, pediatrics, psychology, and education, and including a public representative. In addition, 24 experts in auditory anatomy and physiology, otolaryngology, audiology, aural rehabilitation, education, speech-language pathology, and bioengineering presented data to the consensus panel and a conference audience of 650. EVIDENCE--The literature was searched through MEDLINE and an extensive bibliography of references was provided to the panel and the conference audience. Experts prepared abstracts with relevant citations from the literature. Scientific evidence was given precedence over clinical anecdotal experience. CONSENSUS--The panel, answering predefined consensus questions, developed its conclusions based on the scientific evidence presented in open forum and the scientific literature. CONSENSUS STATEMENT--The panel composed a draft statement that was read in its entirety and circulated to the experts and the audience for comment. Thereafter, the panel resolved conflicting recommendations and released a revised statement at the end of the conference. The panel finalized the revisions within a few weeks after the conference. CONCLUSIONS--Cochlear implantation improves communication ability in most adults with severe-to-profound deafness and frequently leads to positive psychological and social benefits as well. Currently, children at least 2 years old and adults with profound deafness are candidates for implantation. Cochlear implant candidacy should be extended to adults with severe hearing impairment and open-set sentence discrimination that is less than or equal to 30% in the best-aided condition. Access to optimal education and (re)habilitation services is important for adults and is critical for children to maximize the benefits available from cochlear implantation.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

fMRI Evidence for Activation of Multiple Cortical Regions in the Primary Auditory Cortex of Deaf Subjects Users of Multichannel Cochlear Implants
Seghier et al.
Cereb Cortex 2005;15:40-48.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Risk of Bacterial Meningitis in Children with Cochlear Implants
Reefhuis et al.
NEJM 2003;349:435-445.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Payment Under Public and Private Insurance and Access to Cochlear Implants
Garber et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:1145-1152.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Technique for Implantation of a 3-Dimensional Penetrating Electrode Array in the Modiolar Nerve of Cats and Humans
Badi et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:1019-1025.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Surgery and Functional Outcomes in Deaf Children Receiving Cochlear Implants Before Age 2 Years
Hehar et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:11-14.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Auditory Detection and Discrimination in Deaf Cats: Psychophysical and Neural Thresholds for Intracochlear Electrical Signals
Vollmer et al.
J. Neurophysiol. 2001;86:2330-2343.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Cost-Utility Analysis of the Cochlear Implant in Children
Cheng et al.
JAMA 2000;284:850-856.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Electrical Cochlear Stimulation in the Deaf Cat: Comparisons Between Psychophysical and Central Auditory Neuronal Thresholds
Beitel et al.
J. Neurophysiol. 2000;83:2145-2162.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Cost-Utility of the Cochlear Implant in Adults: A Meta-analysis
Cheng and Niparko
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;125:1214-1218.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Prospective Study of the Cost-Utility of the Multichannel Cochlear Implant
Palmer et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;125:1221-1228.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT