Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-bp2c4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-16T13:56:27.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Telephone use by a multi-channel cochlear implant patient

An evaluation using open-set CID sentences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

A. M. Brown ,
G. M. Clark ,
R. C. Dowell ,
L. F. A. Martin  and
P. M. Seligman
A. M. Brown
Affiliation:
Melbourne, Australia
G. M. Clark*
Affiliation:
Melbourne, Australia
R. C. Dowell
Affiliation:
Melbourne, Australia
L. F. A. Martin
Affiliation:
Melbourne, Australia
P. M. Seligman
Affiliation:
Melbourne, Australia
*
Professor G. M. Clark, Department of Otolaryngology,The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne. Victoria 3002.Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A totally deaf with a multiple-channel cochler prosthesis obtained open-set speech discrimation using the telephone. CID Everyday Sentences were presented by telephone to the patient. Who repeated an average of 21 percent when a repeat of the sentences was permitted. This result is consistent with the patient's reports of telephone usage.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 99 , Issue 3 , March 1985 , pp. 231 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Bilger, R. C., and Hopkinson, N. T. (1977) Hearing performance with the auditory prosthesis. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology, 38: (Supplement) 76–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boothroyd, A., and Cawkwell, S. (1970) Vibrotactile thresholds in pure tone audiometry. Acta Ololaryngologica, 69: 381–387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castle, D. L. (1977) Telephone training for the deaf. The Volta Review, pp. 373–378.Google Scholar
Chouard, C-H., Fugain, C., Meyer, B., and Lacombe, H. (1983) Long-term results of the multi-channel cochlear implant. Proceedings of the New York Academy of Science Conference.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, G. M., Tong, Y. C. and Martin, L. F. A. (1981) A multiple-channel cochlear implant: an evaluation using open-set CID sentences. The Laryngoscope, 91: 628–634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, G. M., Dowell, R. C., Brown, A. M., Luscombe, S. M., Pyman, B. C., Webb, R. L., Bailey, Q., Selicman, P. M., and Tong, Y. C. (1983) The clinical trial of a multiple-channel cochlear prosthesis: an initial study on four patients with a profound-total hearing loss. Medical Journal of Australia. (In press.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, G. M., Crosby, P., Dowell, R. C., Kuzma, J., Patrick, J. F., Sfligman, P. M., and Tong, Y. C. (1983) The preliminary clinical trial of a multi-channel cochlear implant hearing prosthesis. Journal of Acoustical Society of America. (In press.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, H. and Silverman, S. R. (1970) Hearing and deafness. Holt. Rinehart and Winston. New York.Google Scholar
Dowell, R. C., Martin, L. F. A., Clark, G. M., Brown, A. M., Luscombe, S. M., Pyman, B. C., Seligman, P. M. and Webb, R. L. (1983) Preliminary results of a clinical trial of a multiple-channel cochlear prosthesis. Paper presented at the 10th Anniversary Cochlear Implant ConferenceSan FranciscoJune 1983.Google Scholar
Eddingion, D. K. (1983) In Cochlear Prostheses—An International Symposium. (Parkins, C. W., and Anderson, S. W., eds.). pp. 241–258. The New York Academy of Sciences. New York, New York.Google Scholar
Fourcin, A. J., Douek, E. E., Moore, B. C. J., Rosen, S., Walliker, J. R., Howard, D. M., Abberton, E., and Frampton, S. (1983) In Cochlear Prostheses—An International Symposium. (Parkins, C. W., and Anderson, S. W., eds.). pp. 280–294.Google Scholar
Hochmair-Desoyer, I. J., Hochmair, E. S., Burian, K., and Fischer, R. E. (1981) Review: four years of experience with cochlear prostheses. Medical Progress through Technology, 8: 107–119.Google Scholar
Martin, L. F. A., Tong, Y. C., and Clark, G. M. (1981) A multiple-channel cochlear implant. Evaluation using speech tracking. Archives of Otolaryngology, 107: 157–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, L. F. A., Dowell, R. C., Brown, A. M. and Clark, G. M. (1983) Rehabilitation for multiple-channel cochlear prosthesis patients. Paper presented at the 10th Anniversary Cochlear Implant ConferenceSan FranciscoJune 1983.Google Scholar
McLeod, R. Jr., and Guenther, M. (1977) Use of an ordinary telephone by an oral deaf person: A case history. Volta Review, pp. 435–442.Google Scholar
Michelson, R., and Schindler, R. (1981) Multi-channel cochlear implant. Preliminary results in man. The Laryngoscope, 91: 38–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, E., Kessler, D., and Schubert, E. (1982) Interim assessment of candidates for cochlear implants. Archives of Otolaryngology, 108: 478–483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sims, D. G. (1978) In Handbook of Clinical Audiobgy. (2nd Ed.) (Katz, J., ed.), pp. 565–580. Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore.Google Scholar
Thielemeyer, M. A., Brimacombe, J. A., and Eisenberg, L. S. (1982) Audiological results with the cochlear implant. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology, 91: (Supplement 91). 27–34.Google Scholar
Tong, Y. C., Millar, J. B., Clark, G. M., Martin, L. F., Busby, P. A., and Patrick, J. F. (1980) Psychophysical and speech perception studies on two multiple-channel cochlear implant patients. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 94: 1241–1256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tong, Y. C., Clark, G. M., Dowell, R. C., Martin, L. F. A., Seligman, P. M. and Patrick, J. F. (1981) A multiple-channel cochlear implant and wearable speech processor. An audiological evaluation. Acta Otolaryngologica, 92: 193–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed