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(12):1365.

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

At the Annual Meeting of the American Triological Society in Palm Beach, Fla, Margaret W. Skinner, PhD, St Louis, and coworkers reported the comparison of benefit from vibrotactile aids and cochlear implants for the post-linguistically deaf adult. The authors evaluated four post-linguistically deaf adults before surgery with a one- or two-channel vibrotactile aid and then evaluated them after surgery with a multichannel, multielectrode, intracochlear implant. Although the vibrotactile aid gave awareness of sound and enhanced flow of conversation, benefit to lipreading was small on videotape tests and speech tracking. With the cochlear implant, on the other hand, benefit to lipreading was significantly greater than with the vibrotactile aid. Scores on sound-only tests were also significantly above chance, and communication was markedly improved with the implant, as compared with the vibrotactile aid. The authors concluded that although postlinguistically deaf adults who meet the criteria for cochlear implantation should be introduced to . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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