SlideShare a Scribd company logo
Mapping, speech perception, and language outcomes for children using
cochlear implants who have a preterm and/or low birth weight history.
Shani

1,2,
Dettman

Shiow Yuan

1,
Oh

Richard

1,2,3
Dowell

The University of Melbourne, Department of Audiology & Speech Pathology, 2 The HEARing Cooperative Research Centre,
3 Royal Victorian Eye & Ear Hospital
1

Background to this study.

A ‘premature’ or ‘preterm’ infant is defined as a live-born infant with a birth weight of 2500g
or less and/or a period of gestation less than 37 completed weeks (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2004; Engle, 2006; Harding, 2007;
World Health Organisation). As a consequence of advancements in prenatal, obstetric and neonatal care, the survival rates for children
born preterm (<37 weeks' gestational age), with a low birth weight (<2500 grams), or both, have improved substantially over the last two
decades. Children born very preterm (<33 weeks' gestational age) with very low birth weight (<1500 grams) are estimated to comprise
0.7% to 2% of all live births (Draper, Zeitlin, Field, Manktelow, & Truffert, 2007; Roberts & Lancaster, 1999). Despite improved survival
rates, these children often have co-morbid cognitive, physical and neurological disabilities further complicated by permanent sensorineural hearing loss (Picard,
2004; Streppel, et al., 1998). The extent to which the sensorineural hearing loss has an ‘in-utero’ or neonatal onset remains unclear, as the hearing loss may be
due neonatal hypoxia and/or hyperbilirubinaemia or the provision of treatments (eg. ototoxic drugs) designed to aid survival.
The aim of this study was to examine whether variables known to impact communication outcomes for full-term children using CIs (who
have sensorineural hearing loss as their single diagnosis), would have the same impact on preterm children using CIs. Specifically, it was hypothesized that
preterm children with longer gestational age, greater birth weight, lesser cognitive delay, more residual hearing, shorter duration of profound loss, communication
mode with an aural/oral emphasis, larger electrical dynamic range, less difficulty with mapping and programming, higher socioeconomic status (SES), and younger
age of implantation would demonstrate better speech perception and language outcomes.

Total number of children
who received CI at
Melbourne CIC
1987 – 2011
N = 700

n= 30 children with
gestational age
<37 weeks, and/or
birthweight < 2500
grams

n=25 subjects

Methods & Materials. A retrospective analysis of over 700 audiological and medical records from the Melbourne paediatric

n=19 subjects able
to complete
either/both
language and
speech perception
testing

database identified 25 children (10 females and 15 males) who met the following inclusion criteria; congenital hearing loss, born < 37
weeks gestational age and/or < 2500 grams in birth weight, and implanted for at least one year. Average gestational age was 28.20
weeks (range 23.60 to 35 weeks, SD 3.76), with n=4 preterm (> 33 and <37 weeks), n=13 very preterm (> 26 and <33 weeks) and n=8
extremely preterm (<26 weeks). Average birth weight was 1040 grams (range 524 to 2430 grams, SD 525.92). Two were preterm
with low birth weights (<2500 grams), n=9 were very preterm with very low birth weights (<1500 grams), and n=7 were extremely
preterm with extremely low birth weights (<1000 grams). Birth weights for the remaining 7 children were unknown. The mean unaided 3-frequency pure tone
average (PTA) for the best ear was 108.11 dB HL (range 85 to 123 dB HL, SD 10.16), mean duration of profound deafness was 2.93 years (range 0.76 to 7.21
years, SD 1.38), and mean age at implantation was 3.80 years (range 1.55 to 15.47 years, SD 2.83). Children completed the open-set CNC monosyllabic
word test (Peterson & Lehiste, 1962), the Bench-Kowal-Bamford (BKB) open-set sentence test (Bench & Bamford, 1979), and language tests where suitable
(either Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test [PPVT-III, Dunn & Dunn, 1997], Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale [RI-TLS, Rossetti, 1990], Preschool Language
Scales [PLS-4, Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 2002], and/or Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals [CELF-4 & CELF Preschool, Semel, Wiig, & Secord,
1992, 1996]). The nature of the child’s response to the ‘map’ programming stimuli was analyzed during the switch on period (weeks 2 to 6 post surgery) and at one
mapping review appointment at 12 months post implant. An educational psychologist also completed testing of cognitive abilities for all children.

n=19 subjects able
to complete
language testing

n=13 subjects able
to complete
speech perception
testing

Excluded n=670

excluded n=1 did not
proceed with CI due
to significant aided
residual hearing &
N=4 with < 6 mo
device experience

n= 6 subjects
unable to complete
language or
speech perception
testing

n=3 able to
provide only MRL
response to
auditory stimuli in
mapping

Results. The speech processor was able to be programmed accurately for 22 out of 25 cases. For Case 2 and 14 with severe

15

Mean Growth Rate = 0.84
Range 0.01 to 3.12
SD

10

0.74

5

0

10

5

0

0

5

10

15

20

dettmans@unimelb.edu.au
www.hearingcrc.org
creating sound value

Figure 2. Open-set word scores, scored for words correct, for
n=13 preterm children using CIs compared with published data.

10

Figure 3. Open-set sentence scores for n=13 preterm children
using CIs compared with published data.

5

0
0

Chronological Age (years)

Figure 4. Individual receptive language trajectories for
n=15 preterm children using CI.

Figure 1. Open-set word scores, scored for phonemes correct,
n=13 preterm children using CIs compared with published data.

15

Equivalent Language Age (yrs)

15

Equivalent Language Age (yrs)

Equivalent Language Age (years)

cognitive delay and Case 21 with a moderate cognitive disability and cerebral palsy, only a maximum response level (MRL) (eg blink
signifying loudness discomfort level) could be obtained at switch-on and at 12-months post implant. The mean open-set word (OSW)
scores for n=13 children who completed testing were 76.8% phonemes (range 48 to 91%; SD 12.7) and 51.8% words (range 12 to
84%; SD 21.0). The mean open-set sentence score was 70.5% (range 18 to 98%; SD 25.7). Figures 1, 2 and 3 (see right) compare
individual pre-term childrens’ scores with mean scores from children with typical gestational age and birth weight (Dowell, et al., 2002a;
Dowell, et al., 2002b; Eisenberg, Kirk, Martinez, Ying, & Miyamoto, 2004; Geers, et al., 2003).
Educational psychologist’s testing indicated the cognitive status for the pre-term children was within the normal range (n=10),
borderline average (n=1), mild delay (n=6), moderate delay (n=3) and severe global delay (n=5). Stepwise linear regression analysis indicated a relationship
between degree of cognitive delay/impairment and all speech perception outcomes. Neither gestational age, birth weight, gender, PTA, communication mode,
SES, nor age at CI were predictive of speech perception outcomes for this small group.
For n=19 children who completed language testing, the mean language delay was 50.19 months (range 6.64 to 125.87 months; SD
30.38). For the n=15 children who completed 2 or more tests over time, the average receptive language slope was 0.84 (range 0.01 to 3.12; SD 0.74, Figure 4
below), where a value of 1.0 indicates the normal vocabulary acquisition rate for hearing peers. Younger age at implant was associated woth better receptive
vocabulary for this group.
Figure 5 (below) illustrates the receptive language outcomes for n=19 preterm children using CIs (filled black circles) compared to
n=163 children (clear diamonds) with typical birth history using CIs (Dettman, Hoenig, Dowell, & Leigh, 2008). The solid grey line represents language growth for a
child with normal hearing. In Figure 6 (below) the normal growth line was adjusted (dashed blue line) for the group average age at implant, so that the progress of
these pre-term children is compared to their hearing age. On this ‘hearing age’ basis, all pre-term children, except Case 3 and 4, performed within one standard
deviation of their hearing peers.

5
10
Chronological Age (yrs)

Figure 5. Individual receptive language results (filled black
circles) for n=19 preterm children using CI compared with
results for full-term children using CI (clear diamonds).

15

0

5
10
Chronological Age (yrs)

15

Figure 6. Individual receptive language results (filled black
circles) for n=19 preterm children using CI compared with
results for full-term children using CI (clear diamonds). Dashed
blue line indicates expected language growth for ‘hearing age’,
ie adjusted for mean 3.8 years age at implant.

Case Study; Subject 6, an extremely preterm
child (24 weeks gestational age with
undocumented birth weight), had auditory
neuropathy and normal cognitive skills, used an
Aural/Oral communication mode and received
bilateral implants sequentially at the age of 1.55
and 4.03 years respectively. This child achieved
language scores within 7 months of
chronological age, had a standard score
between 85 and 100 on both PPVT-III and PLS-4,
and demonstrated a receptive language growth
rate of 1.32 over a period of 3.61 years. Subject 6
obtained
83%
(OSWphonemes),
60%
(OSWwords) and 98% (BKB sentences).

Conclusions.

Variables known to influence speech perception and language outcomes in full-term children with CIs also affect children with a pre-term/low birth weight
neonatal history. There were 3 children for whom the degree of cognitive delay was associated with no measurable implant benefit on formal speech perception and language
tests (but quality of life benefits were not measured in this study). These 3 children were able to give only a maximum (blink) response during mapping. In contrast, there were 13
children for whom substantial speech perception and language benefits were demonstrated. There were exceptional cases such as Case 6 with normal language growth. A
complex range of factors must be considered when discussing outcomes for this population.

Acknowledgements to the children, parents, speech pathologists, audiologists, surgeons & administrative staff at the Cochlear Implant Clinic, RVEEH, Melbourne, Australia.

More Related Content

DOCX
Apa citation
PPTX
Otitis media with effusion: an illustration of ascertainment bias
PDF
Role of infant-directed speech in language development of hearing impaired in...
PPTX
Developmental language disorder and auditory processing disorder: 
Same or di...
PDF
SPL SRS Poster 3-6-15
PDF
How does the brain learn language
PDF
Auditory measures of attention & working memory in children with learning dis...
PDF
Speech and language difficulties (2002)
Apa citation
Otitis media with effusion: an illustration of ascertainment bias
Role of infant-directed speech in language development of hearing impaired in...
Developmental language disorder and auditory processing disorder: 
Same or di...
SPL SRS Poster 3-6-15
How does the brain learn language
Auditory measures of attention & working memory in children with learning dis...
Speech and language difficulties (2002)

What's hot (17)

PDF
Nyborg causes2
PPTX
Outreach Sept 2018: Outi Tuomainen
PDF
Children who are Hard of Hearing: Still Forgotten? 
PDF
Effect of early identification on language acquisit ion in hearing impaired, ...
PDF
Auditory Processing Disorder and Specific Language Impairment
DOCX
Reading List 2016; "Why do some children find language so hard to learn?"
PDF
Alliteration and-rhyme-skills-in-children-with-specific-language-impairment--...
PDF
Underlying nature of specific language impairment
PDF
SLI: diagnostic dilemmas
PDF
A review of fifty cases afasia
PDF
Why Do Some Children Find Language So Hard to Learn?
PPT
ASHA Poster 2015_RArce
PPTX
Sl6003 3.1 underlying deficits and diagnosis 2012
PDF
Why do neurodevelopmental disorders co-occur?
PPT
Genetics and SLI
PPTX
What is Developmental Language Disorder
PPT
Linguistics Sci Poster
Nyborg causes2
Outreach Sept 2018: Outi Tuomainen
Children who are Hard of Hearing: Still Forgotten? 
Effect of early identification on language acquisit ion in hearing impaired, ...
Auditory Processing Disorder and Specific Language Impairment
Reading List 2016; "Why do some children find language so hard to learn?"
Alliteration and-rhyme-skills-in-children-with-specific-language-impairment--...
Underlying nature of specific language impairment
SLI: diagnostic dilemmas
A review of fifty cases afasia
Why Do Some Children Find Language So Hard to Learn?
ASHA Poster 2015_RArce
Sl6003 3.1 underlying deficits and diagnosis 2012
Why do neurodevelopmental disorders co-occur?
Genetics and SLI
What is Developmental Language Disorder
Linguistics Sci Poster
Ad

Similar to Mapping speech-perception-and-language-outcomes-for-children-using-cochlear-implants (20)

PPT
Mapping, speech perception, and language outcomes for children using cochlear...
PDF
Early language outcomes for children receiving cochlear implants under three ...
PPTX
PPTX
Value of early intervention for hearing impairment on speech and language aqu...
PDF
Counseling for Parents of Children Diagnosed with Hearing Loss - Dimity Dorna...
DOCX
Apa citation
PPT
Hearing loss in children
PPT
Cochlear implant (3)
PDF
Primary caregivers prosodic input to their children using cochlear implants
PPTX
The deaf child
PDF
Effectiveness of Early Intervention in Improving Child Outcomes – current res...
PPTX
Auditory & Developmental Neurophysiology: Cochlear Implants seminar
PDF
Neonatal hearing test Eng
PPSX
Recent Advances in Cochlear Implant Candidacy
PPTX
the-deaf modified.pptx
PPTX
Cochlear implantation journey candidacy to communication (1)
PPT
Introduction to hearing implairment &amp; cochlear implantation]
PDF
Universal neonatal hearing screening - is it obligatory, voluntary or not rea...
PDF
Universal neonatal hearing screening: obligatory, voluntary or not really nec...
Mapping, speech perception, and language outcomes for children using cochlear...
Early language outcomes for children receiving cochlear implants under three ...
Value of early intervention for hearing impairment on speech and language aqu...
Counseling for Parents of Children Diagnosed with Hearing Loss - Dimity Dorna...
Apa citation
Hearing loss in children
Cochlear implant (3)
Primary caregivers prosodic input to their children using cochlear implants
The deaf child
Effectiveness of Early Intervention in Improving Child Outcomes – current res...
Auditory & Developmental Neurophysiology: Cochlear Implants seminar
Neonatal hearing test Eng
Recent Advances in Cochlear Implant Candidacy
the-deaf modified.pptx
Cochlear implantation journey candidacy to communication (1)
Introduction to hearing implairment &amp; cochlear implantation]
Universal neonatal hearing screening - is it obligatory, voluntary or not rea...
Universal neonatal hearing screening: obligatory, voluntary or not really nec...
Ad

More from HEARnet _ (20)

PDF
Use of ConeBeam Computed Tomography to determine cochlear length and implant ...
PDF
Training in adult cochlear iimpant users
PDF
How far down does the top down control of speech processing go? - HEARing CRC...
PDF
Should i get a hearing aid now - HEARing CRC PhD presentation
PDF
Patient and family centred care for young adults - HEARing CRC PhD presentation
PDF
Organisational outcomes of person centred hearing care - HEARing CRC PhD pres...
PDF
MEG system for cochlear implants ecipients and auditory entrainment - HEARing...
PDF
Longterm effects of conductive hearing loss -HEARing CRC PhD presentation
PDF
Hearing loss and the acquistion of english plural morphology - HEARing CRC Ph...
PDF
Hearing, listening and reading: A complex interplay of factors that contribut...
PDF
Hearing health of live music sound engineers - HEARing CRC PhD presentation
PDF
Evaluating audiological intervention options for people with dementia living ...
PDF
Effects of age and working memory in understanding speech in conversational n...
PDF
Development of tone sandhi in mandarin speaking children with Cochlear Implan...
PDF
Development of an on-line assessment of speech perception - HEARing CRC PhD p...
PDF
Benefits of music training for children with hearing loss - HEARing CRC PhD p...
PDF
Efficacy of auditory training in adults with hearing loss and auditory proces...
PDF
Audiology Students and Patient-Centred Communication - HEARing CRC PhD presen...
PDF
Artificially enhancing better-ear glimpsing cues to improve understanding of ...
PDF
My Hearing Healthcare Journey
Use of ConeBeam Computed Tomography to determine cochlear length and implant ...
Training in adult cochlear iimpant users
How far down does the top down control of speech processing go? - HEARing CRC...
Should i get a hearing aid now - HEARing CRC PhD presentation
Patient and family centred care for young adults - HEARing CRC PhD presentation
Organisational outcomes of person centred hearing care - HEARing CRC PhD pres...
MEG system for cochlear implants ecipients and auditory entrainment - HEARing...
Longterm effects of conductive hearing loss -HEARing CRC PhD presentation
Hearing loss and the acquistion of english plural morphology - HEARing CRC Ph...
Hearing, listening and reading: A complex interplay of factors that contribut...
Hearing health of live music sound engineers - HEARing CRC PhD presentation
Evaluating audiological intervention options for people with dementia living ...
Effects of age and working memory in understanding speech in conversational n...
Development of tone sandhi in mandarin speaking children with Cochlear Implan...
Development of an on-line assessment of speech perception - HEARing CRC PhD p...
Benefits of music training for children with hearing loss - HEARing CRC PhD p...
Efficacy of auditory training in adults with hearing loss and auditory proces...
Audiology Students and Patient-Centred Communication - HEARing CRC PhD presen...
Artificially enhancing better-ear glimpsing cues to improve understanding of ...
My Hearing Healthcare Journey

Recently uploaded (20)

PPTX
SKIN Anatomy and physiology and associated diseases
PPTX
Clinical approach and Radiotherapy principles.pptx
PPTX
surgery guide for USMLE step 2-part 1.pptx
PPTX
POLYCYSTIC OVARIAN SYNDROME.pptx by Dr( med) Charles Amoateng
PPTX
Human Reproduction: Anatomy, Physiology & Clinical Insights.pptx
PPT
HIV lecture final - student.pptfghjjkkejjhhge
PDF
شيت_عطا_0000000000000000000000000000.pdf
PPT
Breast Cancer management for medicsl student.ppt
DOCX
RUHS II MBBS Microbiology Paper-II with Answer Key | 6th August 2025 (New Sch...
PPT
Copy-Histopathology Practical by CMDA ESUTH CHAPTER(0) - Copy.ppt
PPTX
LUNG ABSCESS - respiratory medicine - ppt
PPT
MENTAL HEALTH - NOTES.ppt for nursing students
PPTX
History and examination of abdomen, & pelvis .pptx
PPTX
Important Obstetric Emergency that must be recognised
PPT
Obstructive sleep apnea in orthodontics treatment
PDF
NEET PG 2025 | 200 High-Yield Recall Topics Across All Subjects
PPT
OPIOID ANALGESICS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS
PDF
Therapeutic Potential of Citrus Flavonoids in Metabolic Inflammation and Ins...
PPTX
15.MENINGITIS AND ENCEPHALITIS-elias.pptx
PDF
Human Health And Disease hggyutgghg .pdf
SKIN Anatomy and physiology and associated diseases
Clinical approach and Radiotherapy principles.pptx
surgery guide for USMLE step 2-part 1.pptx
POLYCYSTIC OVARIAN SYNDROME.pptx by Dr( med) Charles Amoateng
Human Reproduction: Anatomy, Physiology & Clinical Insights.pptx
HIV lecture final - student.pptfghjjkkejjhhge
شيت_عطا_0000000000000000000000000000.pdf
Breast Cancer management for medicsl student.ppt
RUHS II MBBS Microbiology Paper-II with Answer Key | 6th August 2025 (New Sch...
Copy-Histopathology Practical by CMDA ESUTH CHAPTER(0) - Copy.ppt
LUNG ABSCESS - respiratory medicine - ppt
MENTAL HEALTH - NOTES.ppt for nursing students
History and examination of abdomen, & pelvis .pptx
Important Obstetric Emergency that must be recognised
Obstructive sleep apnea in orthodontics treatment
NEET PG 2025 | 200 High-Yield Recall Topics Across All Subjects
OPIOID ANALGESICS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS
Therapeutic Potential of Citrus Flavonoids in Metabolic Inflammation and Ins...
15.MENINGITIS AND ENCEPHALITIS-elias.pptx
Human Health And Disease hggyutgghg .pdf

Mapping speech-perception-and-language-outcomes-for-children-using-cochlear-implants

  • 1. Mapping, speech perception, and language outcomes for children using cochlear implants who have a preterm and/or low birth weight history. Shani 1,2, Dettman Shiow Yuan 1, Oh Richard 1,2,3 Dowell The University of Melbourne, Department of Audiology & Speech Pathology, 2 The HEARing Cooperative Research Centre, 3 Royal Victorian Eye & Ear Hospital 1 Background to this study. A ‘premature’ or ‘preterm’ infant is defined as a live-born infant with a birth weight of 2500g or less and/or a period of gestation less than 37 completed weeks (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2004; Engle, 2006; Harding, 2007; World Health Organisation). As a consequence of advancements in prenatal, obstetric and neonatal care, the survival rates for children born preterm (<37 weeks' gestational age), with a low birth weight (<2500 grams), or both, have improved substantially over the last two decades. Children born very preterm (<33 weeks' gestational age) with very low birth weight (<1500 grams) are estimated to comprise 0.7% to 2% of all live births (Draper, Zeitlin, Field, Manktelow, & Truffert, 2007; Roberts & Lancaster, 1999). Despite improved survival rates, these children often have co-morbid cognitive, physical and neurological disabilities further complicated by permanent sensorineural hearing loss (Picard, 2004; Streppel, et al., 1998). The extent to which the sensorineural hearing loss has an ‘in-utero’ or neonatal onset remains unclear, as the hearing loss may be due neonatal hypoxia and/or hyperbilirubinaemia or the provision of treatments (eg. ototoxic drugs) designed to aid survival. The aim of this study was to examine whether variables known to impact communication outcomes for full-term children using CIs (who have sensorineural hearing loss as their single diagnosis), would have the same impact on preterm children using CIs. Specifically, it was hypothesized that preterm children with longer gestational age, greater birth weight, lesser cognitive delay, more residual hearing, shorter duration of profound loss, communication mode with an aural/oral emphasis, larger electrical dynamic range, less difficulty with mapping and programming, higher socioeconomic status (SES), and younger age of implantation would demonstrate better speech perception and language outcomes. Total number of children who received CI at Melbourne CIC 1987 – 2011 N = 700 n= 30 children with gestational age <37 weeks, and/or birthweight < 2500 grams n=25 subjects Methods & Materials. A retrospective analysis of over 700 audiological and medical records from the Melbourne paediatric n=19 subjects able to complete either/both language and speech perception testing database identified 25 children (10 females and 15 males) who met the following inclusion criteria; congenital hearing loss, born < 37 weeks gestational age and/or < 2500 grams in birth weight, and implanted for at least one year. Average gestational age was 28.20 weeks (range 23.60 to 35 weeks, SD 3.76), with n=4 preterm (> 33 and <37 weeks), n=13 very preterm (> 26 and <33 weeks) and n=8 extremely preterm (<26 weeks). Average birth weight was 1040 grams (range 524 to 2430 grams, SD 525.92). Two were preterm with low birth weights (<2500 grams), n=9 were very preterm with very low birth weights (<1500 grams), and n=7 were extremely preterm with extremely low birth weights (<1000 grams). Birth weights for the remaining 7 children were unknown. The mean unaided 3-frequency pure tone average (PTA) for the best ear was 108.11 dB HL (range 85 to 123 dB HL, SD 10.16), mean duration of profound deafness was 2.93 years (range 0.76 to 7.21 years, SD 1.38), and mean age at implantation was 3.80 years (range 1.55 to 15.47 years, SD 2.83). Children completed the open-set CNC monosyllabic word test (Peterson & Lehiste, 1962), the Bench-Kowal-Bamford (BKB) open-set sentence test (Bench & Bamford, 1979), and language tests where suitable (either Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test [PPVT-III, Dunn & Dunn, 1997], Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale [RI-TLS, Rossetti, 1990], Preschool Language Scales [PLS-4, Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 2002], and/or Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals [CELF-4 & CELF Preschool, Semel, Wiig, & Secord, 1992, 1996]). The nature of the child’s response to the ‘map’ programming stimuli was analyzed during the switch on period (weeks 2 to 6 post surgery) and at one mapping review appointment at 12 months post implant. An educational psychologist also completed testing of cognitive abilities for all children. n=19 subjects able to complete language testing n=13 subjects able to complete speech perception testing Excluded n=670 excluded n=1 did not proceed with CI due to significant aided residual hearing & N=4 with < 6 mo device experience n= 6 subjects unable to complete language or speech perception testing n=3 able to provide only MRL response to auditory stimuli in mapping Results. The speech processor was able to be programmed accurately for 22 out of 25 cases. For Case 2 and 14 with severe 15 Mean Growth Rate = 0.84 Range 0.01 to 3.12 SD 10 0.74 5 0 10 5 0 0 5 10 15 20 dettmans@unimelb.edu.au www.hearingcrc.org creating sound value Figure 2. Open-set word scores, scored for words correct, for n=13 preterm children using CIs compared with published data. 10 Figure 3. Open-set sentence scores for n=13 preterm children using CIs compared with published data. 5 0 0 Chronological Age (years) Figure 4. Individual receptive language trajectories for n=15 preterm children using CI. Figure 1. Open-set word scores, scored for phonemes correct, n=13 preterm children using CIs compared with published data. 15 Equivalent Language Age (yrs) 15 Equivalent Language Age (yrs) Equivalent Language Age (years) cognitive delay and Case 21 with a moderate cognitive disability and cerebral palsy, only a maximum response level (MRL) (eg blink signifying loudness discomfort level) could be obtained at switch-on and at 12-months post implant. The mean open-set word (OSW) scores for n=13 children who completed testing were 76.8% phonemes (range 48 to 91%; SD 12.7) and 51.8% words (range 12 to 84%; SD 21.0). The mean open-set sentence score was 70.5% (range 18 to 98%; SD 25.7). Figures 1, 2 and 3 (see right) compare individual pre-term childrens’ scores with mean scores from children with typical gestational age and birth weight (Dowell, et al., 2002a; Dowell, et al., 2002b; Eisenberg, Kirk, Martinez, Ying, & Miyamoto, 2004; Geers, et al., 2003). Educational psychologist’s testing indicated the cognitive status for the pre-term children was within the normal range (n=10), borderline average (n=1), mild delay (n=6), moderate delay (n=3) and severe global delay (n=5). Stepwise linear regression analysis indicated a relationship between degree of cognitive delay/impairment and all speech perception outcomes. Neither gestational age, birth weight, gender, PTA, communication mode, SES, nor age at CI were predictive of speech perception outcomes for this small group. For n=19 children who completed language testing, the mean language delay was 50.19 months (range 6.64 to 125.87 months; SD 30.38). For the n=15 children who completed 2 or more tests over time, the average receptive language slope was 0.84 (range 0.01 to 3.12; SD 0.74, Figure 4 below), where a value of 1.0 indicates the normal vocabulary acquisition rate for hearing peers. Younger age at implant was associated woth better receptive vocabulary for this group. Figure 5 (below) illustrates the receptive language outcomes for n=19 preterm children using CIs (filled black circles) compared to n=163 children (clear diamonds) with typical birth history using CIs (Dettman, Hoenig, Dowell, & Leigh, 2008). The solid grey line represents language growth for a child with normal hearing. In Figure 6 (below) the normal growth line was adjusted (dashed blue line) for the group average age at implant, so that the progress of these pre-term children is compared to their hearing age. On this ‘hearing age’ basis, all pre-term children, except Case 3 and 4, performed within one standard deviation of their hearing peers. 5 10 Chronological Age (yrs) Figure 5. Individual receptive language results (filled black circles) for n=19 preterm children using CI compared with results for full-term children using CI (clear diamonds). 15 0 5 10 Chronological Age (yrs) 15 Figure 6. Individual receptive language results (filled black circles) for n=19 preterm children using CI compared with results for full-term children using CI (clear diamonds). Dashed blue line indicates expected language growth for ‘hearing age’, ie adjusted for mean 3.8 years age at implant. Case Study; Subject 6, an extremely preterm child (24 weeks gestational age with undocumented birth weight), had auditory neuropathy and normal cognitive skills, used an Aural/Oral communication mode and received bilateral implants sequentially at the age of 1.55 and 4.03 years respectively. This child achieved language scores within 7 months of chronological age, had a standard score between 85 and 100 on both PPVT-III and PLS-4, and demonstrated a receptive language growth rate of 1.32 over a period of 3.61 years. Subject 6 obtained 83% (OSWphonemes), 60% (OSWwords) and 98% (BKB sentences). Conclusions. Variables known to influence speech perception and language outcomes in full-term children with CIs also affect children with a pre-term/low birth weight neonatal history. There were 3 children for whom the degree of cognitive delay was associated with no measurable implant benefit on formal speech perception and language tests (but quality of life benefits were not measured in this study). These 3 children were able to give only a maximum (blink) response during mapping. In contrast, there were 13 children for whom substantial speech perception and language benefits were demonstrated. There were exceptional cases such as Case 6 with normal language growth. A complex range of factors must be considered when discussing outcomes for this population. Acknowledgements to the children, parents, speech pathologists, audiologists, surgeons & administrative staff at the Cochlear Implant Clinic, RVEEH, Melbourne, Australia.