This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

WILLIAM MEYERHOFF, MD, PHD
Dallas

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1988;114(11):1229-1231.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Bruce Gantz, MD, and collaborators at the University of Iowa, Iowa City, reported a comparison between the performance of five different cochlear implant designs at the Annual Meeting of the American Triological Society in Palm Beach, Fla. The authors reviewed audiologic performances of 54 postlingually deafened adults wearing cochlear implants. Each subject had nine months' or more experience with one of five different cochlear prostheses (Los Angeles Single Channel, Vienna Single Channel, Melbourne Multichannel, Utah Multichannel, and San Francisco Multichannel). An extensive battery of preoperative tests was designed to assess cognitive abilities, electrophysiologic performance, psychophysical percepts, compliance behavior, and biographic details. The authors concluded from their study that the multichannel designs enabled subjects to recognize more environmental sounds, provide more speech-reading enhancement, and enabled most users to understand limited speech in the sound-only condition compared with the single-channel implant group. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?