Audiologist recommends Cochlear Implant
Don
amplify everything fine, but speech sounds so brassy I can not
understand the words. She recommends a cochlear implant.
lklein
You need to be evaluated by a cochlear implant center. Go to
www.cochlearamericas.com and look for a clinic/hospital near you that does
cochlear implants. They will test you with the best possible hearing aids.
If you score less than 50% on the HINT sentence test in the possible
implanted ear or 60% with both ears you will qualify for implantation.
As someone else mentioned, it is basically out patient surgery lasting
somewhere between 2 and 3 hours. There is minimal pain afterward and you
are usually activated about 3 to 4 weeks after the surgery.
It gave me my life back.
Lil
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/group/alt.support.hearing-loss/
More information at http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/faq.html
Steve W. Jackson
Mike Burke <mbu...@pcug.org.au> wrote:
> Well, as one satisfied implantee, I can only say that if you are
> assessed as a suitable candidate, and if you can afford it, go for it.
>
> The operation is not trivial (none done under general anaesthetic
> are), but it is as near to it as possible. The recovery was painless
> for me and any discomfort/inconvenience minimal. Once the speech
> porcessor was fitted a couple of weeks after the operation, the
> benefit was dramatic and immediate.
>
> I got my life back again.
>
> Mique
I've been through this twice. I have zero regrets about my decision to
pursue either implant. That's not to say that my post-implant hearing
is perfect (nothing will ever likely match what we had), but it's better
than the alternative, IMHO. :)
I have to say I'm a little struck, though, by people saying that
recovery was painless. My recovery was *not* painless. It hurt like
hell, to be blunt. I stayed overnight in the hospital after each
surgery. But I knew what I was in for after my first implant and still
chose to pursue the second...and I would do it again because it was my
best course of action.
In any event, I agree with Mike Burke that, if you can afford it (via
insurance or whatever other options) and are deemed a suitable
candidate, you should probably pursue it. While each person's results
vary a bit, it's pretty much certain it'll be a life changing outcome
for you.
= Steve =
--
Steve W. Jackson
Montgomery, Alabama
Don
hope others will chime in with their comments about it and also would be
nice to know where your procedures were done.
I am contemplating Ohio State University Medical Center since it is only
a two hour drive from my home.
Don
Mike Burke wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:49:27 -0500, "Steve W. Jackson"
> <stevew...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> I have to say I'm a little struck, though, by people saying that
>> recovery was painless. My recovery was *not* painless. It hurt like
>> hell, to be blunt. I stayed overnight in the hospital after each
>> surgery. But I knew what I was in for after my first implant and still
>> chose to pursue the second...and I would do it again because it was my
>> best course of action.
>
> I'm surprised to hear that you suffered pain, Steve. Maybe it's just
> that I have a thick skull or something but I didn't feel any at all.
>
> Just lucky I guess.
>
> But the benefits are certainly immense.
>
> Mike
Don
different hearing aids and one required an ear mold, and they never
asked for a penny.
With Starkey people, I had to pay $7800 up front to even try out their
hearing aid.
Those are the only two companies I've tried.
Don
Steve W. Jackson
Mike Burke <mbu...@pcug.org.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:49:27 -0500, "Steve W. Jackson"
> <stevew...@knology.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >I have to say I'm a little struck, though, by people saying that
> >recovery was painless. My recovery was *not* painless. It hurt like
> >hell, to be blunt. I stayed overnight in the hospital after each
> >surgery. But I knew what I was in for after my first implant and still
> >chose to pursue the second...and I would do it again because it was my
> >best course of action.
>
> I'm surprised to hear that you suffered pain, Steve. Maybe it's just
> that I have a thick skull or something but I didn't feel any at all.
>
> Just lucky I guess.
>
> But the benefits are certainly immense.
>
> Mike
To be perfectly honest, knowing what was done to my head during the two
surgeries, I really can't see how it's possible to go through this with
*no* pain...maybe I'm a wuss! :)
But as I said, I'd do it again without hesitation, pain or no.
lklein
each time. Everyone is different.
Steve W. Jackson
wrote:
> It's strange that some have experienced pain and others have not. I
> hope others will chime in with their comments about it and also would be
> nice to know where your procedures were done.
>
> I am contemplating Ohio State University Medical Center since it is only
> a two hour drive from my home.
>
>
> Don
I will suggest that you might want to consider subsequent visits to an
audiologist as a possible factor in selection. After the surgery,
you'll have to wait a while for swelling to subside, incision healing,
etc., before actually getting a sound processor and having your CI
activated. (In my case, that was about 5 weeks the first time and 3.5
to 4 the second.) In the early days, you'll likely find yourself
needing to visit the audiologist more often for fine tuning and
adjustments, as your brain and/or auditory nerve will make adjustments
of their own. Over time, it's likely that you'll see a reduction in the
*need* to go, but I doubt it'll ever be possible to completely stop.
For me these visits are a bit annoying because I can count on losing at
least 5 hours out of a work day for the round trip and audiology visit.
I have to drive up, possibly eat while out, pay for parking, return,
etc. So that ends up being kind of costly in several ways. I go if I
need to, but I sure don't like the hit I have to take on lost work time.
In my case, since that doctor uses Cochlear branded products, there's no
other place in Alabama I could've chosen had I wanted to research and
consider another center. I don't know if another company's product
might be available here in my hometown. And this is in no way a
complaint about my doctor or audiologist. It's just that I knew none of
this in advance, so I thought I'd pass it along in case you have other
options and want to consider such in your decision making. When all is
said and done, despite those inconveniences, I still don't regret
getting my implants or sticking with the surgeon and audiologist I've
got.
lklein
I live in Illinois and had both my implants done at the University of Iowa
in Iowa City. It takes me about 3 1/2 hours each way-but for me it was
worth the travel.
dsi1
> assessed as a suitable candidate, and if you can afford it, go for it.
>
> The operation is not trivial (none done under general anaesthetic
> are), but it is as near to it as possible. The recovery was painless
> for me and any discomfort/inconvenience minimal. Once the speech
> porcessor was fitted a couple of weeks after the operation, the
> benefit was dramatic and immediate.
>
> I got my life back again.
>
> Mique
Wouldn't it be better to hold surgery off as a last option? Isn't that
usually the case? My guess is that the CI in 5 or 10 years will be
greatly improved from the ones available now, or maybe there may be a
cure for hearing loss. Under what conditions would you recommend waiting
before having a CI? Thanks.
lklein
a big role in whether you decide to have a cochlear implant. There is
nothing better than natural hearing, but if hearing aids can't improve
your loss and you have become isolated and depressed-then waiting for some
future cure or better implant isn't the answer.
I can remember that they were talking about growing hair cells in chickens
back in 2002-and that maybe in 10 to 15 years they would be able to regrow
hairs in the cochlea-Six years later they are still giving that time
line-although I do think that it will happen at some point with stem cell
research.
Another issue is that those nerves in the cochlea do best when they are
stimulated. Also, it seems that your brain takes less time to adjust to a
cochlear implant when the duration of hearing loss is shorter.
Something else you should know-most cochlear implants are backwards
compatible. That means you don't have to be re implanted when the newer
innovations in processors come about. They are able to leave space on the
computer chips in the internal processor to accommodate improvements.
Each person needs to decide for themselves. Personally it gave me my life
back. I'm back working and I enjoy visiting with my grand kids, family and
friends. I seldom think of myself as deaf until I hear the beeps that
signal the battery is low.
Ken
dsi 1asked: Wouldn't it be better to hold surgery off as a last
option?
Noone goes CI if normal hearing aids can do the job. But when you
reach the stage, as I did, where there is no practical alternative to
CI, then don't delay. The results are incredible - all the evidence,
and my personal experience, is that CI takes your hearing back to
where it was about 10 - 15 years ago. Remarkable speech clarity and
restoration of environmental sounds.
The main changes in CI technology over the years have been, firstly,
the number of electrodes and, secondly, the processing software. If
you think about the problems involved in designing an insert a few cm
long with more than 70-odd contacts, operating in a moist environment,
you will see why that part of the equation is not going to change much
in the years ahead. And the processors/software are, as iklein says,
backwards-compatible. One of the members of the group with a CI, who
was implanted about a decade ago, has just upgraded to the latest
Freedom processor.
The big barrier to going CI is the cost but most people seem to have
some sort of Government or private health cover which bears the brunt.
dsi1
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:06:33 -1000, dsi1 <ds...@spamworld.com> wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't it be better to hold surgery off as a last option? Isn't that
>> usually the case? My guess is that the CI in 5 or 10 years will be
>> greatly improved from the ones available now, or maybe there may be a
>> cure for hearing loss. Under what conditions would you recommend waiting
>> before having a CI? Thanks.
>
>
>
> If you need an implant, you need it now. If you are still getting
> significant benefit from normal aids, you don't need one yet.
>
> I went down the waiting, waiting, waiting route. If I'd had an
> implant when I first needed one, I could have kept on working for a
> living instead of being forced to retire at age 47, and to spend the
> next 13 years in increasing isolation from family, friends and the
> world. It wasn't until my daughter-in-law forced the issue when our
> first grand-child was due that I took the plunge.
>
> As Lil sys, Cochlear speech processors are backwards compatible, so
> you can keep up with developments. Waiting for haircell or nerve
> regeneration to get out of the lab into the real world will consume
> half your life at least, even if you were born yesterday.
>
> Do it now if you're a suitable candidate.
>
> Mike
dsi1
>> usually the case? My guess is that the CI in 5 or 10 years will be
>> greatly improved from the ones available now, or maybe there may be a
>> cure for hearing loss. Under what conditions would you recommend waiting
>> before having a CI? Thanks.
>
>
>
> If you need an implant, you need it now. If you are still getting
> significant benefit from normal aids, you don't need one yet.
>
> I went down the waiting, waiting, waiting route. If I'd had an
> implant when I first needed one, I could have kept on working for a
> living instead of being forced to retire at age 47, and to spend the
> next 13 years in increasing isolation from family, friends and the
> world. It wasn't until my daughter-in-law forced the issue when our
> first grand-child was due that I took the plunge.
>
> As Lil sys, Cochlear speech processors are backwards compatible, so
> you can keep up with developments. Waiting for haircell or nerve
> regeneration to get out of the lab into the real world will consume
> half your life at least, even if you were born yesterday.
>
> Do it now if you're a suitable candidate.
>
> Mike
Thanks Mike and Ken. I'll have to read up on what's involved. I would
have thought that the critical component and the one open for the most
development would be the electrode implant. Anyway, thanks for the info.
Ken
I said: The main changes in CI technology over the years have been,
firstly,
the number of electrodes and, secondly, the processing software. If
you think about the problems involved in designing an insert a few cm
long with more than 70-odd contacts, operating in a moist environment,
you will see why that part of the equation is not going to change much
in the years ahead.
Note that ''70-odd' should have been 20-odd - the current number of
electrodes in the Cochlear Freedom system. But also note that the
first implants (3M in the US in the 70s) had only one electrode and
over a thousand of them were fitted.
Steve W. Jackson
dsi1 <ds...@spamworld.com> wrote:
I agree that surgery should be a last option -- sort of. Because his
provider recommended a CI doesn't mean that an implant surgeon will
necessarily find him a good candidate. But if the surgeon does consider
him a good candidate, then there's the obvious question...what does he
do for hearing in the 5/10 years while he waits to see "if" something
newer and better will come along? And how long should he wait just in
case a cure is developed? It's a tricky question. And as someone who
had a serious quality of life impact from sudden onset hearing loss, I
had to deal with it already...so I now have two CIs.
Ken
More on this: Cochlear have been exploring a 48-electrode array for
years but the scuttlebutt is that it is hard going - 22 electrodes are
a remarkable achievement and, going beyond this, apart from the other
problems, the need for proximity to the organ of corti becomes more
pressing and is difficult to achieve. Bearing in mind the remarkable
results achieved with 22 electrodes, except for music, I think it is
unlikely that doubling the number would add much for speech and that
the increase would be insufficient to make much difference for music.
I seem to recall that the number of hair cells is measured in the
thousands.
So anyone waiting for a significant leap in electrode technology in
our lifetime should not hold their breath. And, as I said, there is no
need to delay on account of possible gains in software/processor tech
because these are backward-compatible.