![]() ![]() There were logical bases for assuming that a cochlear implant would not be an appropriate or especially successful intervention for what the early ANSD researchers thought was hearing loss due to a neural degenerative condition. The recommendation echoes that made by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (2007), whose current position statement indicates that cochlear implantation should be given careful consideration for any child who experiences only limited benefit from appropriately fit amplification. At that time, it was often supposed that cochlear implants would not be a viable option for remediation in this population. This is a considerable departure from the first years after ANSD was identified and classified as a possible neural disorder (Sininger, Hood, Starr, Berlin, & Picton, 1995 Starr, Picton, Sininger, Hood, & Berlin, 1996). Another outcome was the recommendation that cochlear implantation be considered as a treatment option in the event of poor progress in auditory language development and speech understanding, regardless of behavioral audiometric thresholds. Among the many outcomes of the conference was a consensus to change the terminology used for referring to this particular type of hearing impairment to auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD). The goal of the conference was to discuss a myriad of issues related to this auditory disorder, which is characterized by apparently normal outer hair cell function in combination with impaired or absent conduction of synchronous signals by the auditory nerve. ![]() In 2008, a group composed of audiologists, hearing scientists, medical geneticists, neonatologists, and neurologists met in Como, Italy, for the Guidelines and Development Conference on the Identification and Management of Children With Auditory Neuropathy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |