Profound hearing loss + hearing aid questions

something else i'd like to mention is the fact that many (not most, but many) D/deaf people are on medicaid or medical meaning that the hospital who chooses to implant them loses a significant amount of money on each ci surgery they perform. a ci center isn't going to implant someone like that simply for the sake of implanting them.
 
Who are these people that you know with great hearing who are running out to get implants? It is a surgery! People don't take that lightly. I think I once read that less than 2% of CI candidates will ever be implanted. Why do you think it should be stricter? I think insurance should be easier! I think there are people out there fighting to get the proper amplification they need and want, but are being held up by paperwork and burocrasy. Why should it be more difficult?
Click to expand...
Offhand, someone on one of my Hearing Aid related listservs has 80% hearing with hearing aids and he was thinking about getting implanted. Also back in the days of DumbNotes, I remember a poster who was a mom of two boys who were really good HA users got them both implanted. (they qualified b/c unaided they had a profound loss) Yes, I know..... ancedotes do not equate with data. I do think overall the gross majority of potential implantees aren't taking it lightly. I am not picking on anyone here. It does seem like most CI canidates seem to be totally off the bat canidates who need it. I do recall reading an article at Hearing Exchange that said that Nothing wrong with that. Matter of fact, if you completely and obviously need the surgery, and hearing aids really aren't helping all that much, then I think that insurance companies/ Medicaid should automaticly rubber stamp their approval for those surguries. This includes potential canidates who have things like severe tinitutas or recruitment.
Maybe the blip of ambigious canidates that I'm noticing actually equates with people who are somewhat wealthy or who have been drilled to think they NEED the latest hearing aid/CI. After all, the auditory-verbal methodology does tend to push "you gotta have the latest gizmo" thinking.
I have noticed that a lot of the ambigious canidates tend to be AG Bell members. (in other words people who tend to really go with improved technology) Like....I have noticed that some of the ambis get the CI to be able to "talk on the phone" or whatever sitution that doesn't have to do with one on one communication. (they ignore the fact that most just hoh folks have issues in those areas) I don't think that the ambis tend to out there in large numbers. ...it's just that they stand out more you know? It's hard to say really what the true stats are, since there seems to be a dearth of hard data out there. It really would be interesting to find out socilogical and other info on implantees.
Also, the hype about CIs for ambigious folks kind of reminds me of how AG Bell and audis were hyping up digital aids back in the 90's.
Maybe I'm just noticing abbrivant statistical bleeps. I do remember reading an article at Hearing Exchange that said that most people who were eligable for implantation weren't getting them.
 
It is not easy to just run out and get implants. The process is long. Between the Dr visit, the CAT scan, the audiologist test and reteat. Don't forget insurance doesn't approve without cause. The out of pocket cost is high depending on if you have insurance. I'm still paying for my surgery and it was done in July 2007.

Can you defind an ambigious candidate?
 
deafdyke said:
Offhand, someone on one of my Hearing Aid related listservs has 80% hearing with hearing aids and he was thinking about getting implanted. Also back in the days of DumbNotes, I remember a poster who was a mom of two boys who were really good HA users got them both implanted. (they qualified b/c unaided they had a profound loss) Yes, I know..... ancedotes do not equate with data. I do think overall the gross majority of potential implantees aren't taking it lightly. I am not picking on anyone here. It does seem like most CI canidates seem to be totally off the bat canidates who need it. I do recall reading an article at Hearing Exchange that said that Nothing wrong with that. Matter of fact, if you completely and obviously need the surgery, and hearing aids really aren't helping all that much, then I think that insurance companies/ Medicaid should automaticly rubber stamp their approval for those surguries. This includes potential canidates who have things like severe tinitutas or recruitment.
Maybe the blip of ambigious canidates that I'm noticing actually equates with people who are somewhat wealthy or who have been drilled to think they NEED the latest hearing aid/CI. After all, the auditory-verbal methodology does tend to push "you gotta have the latest gizmo" thinking.
I have noticed that a lot of the ambigious canidates tend to be AG Bell members. (in other words people who tend to really go with improved technology) Like....I have noticed that some of the ambis get the CI to be able to "talk on the phone" or whatever sitution that doesn't have to do with one on one communication. (they ignore the fact that most just hoh folks have issues in those areas) I don't think that the ambis tend to out there in large numbers. ...it's just that they stand out more you know? It's hard to say really what the true stats are, since there seems to be a dearth of hard data out there. It really would be interesting to find out socilogical and other info on implantees.
Also, the hype about CIs for ambigious folks kind of reminds me of how AG Bell and audis were hyping up digital aids back in the 90's.
Maybe I'm just noticing abbrivant statistical bleeps. I do remember reading an article at Hearing Exchange that said that most people who were eligable for implantation weren't getting them.
Click to expand...

what's wrong with getting a ci in order to hear on the phone? that's one of the reasons why i got mine. :dunno:

also, where do you get the idea that "ambiguous" candidates are being implanted? when someone is deemed a ci candidate, it's because they receive little or no benefit from hearing aids.

furthermore, ci companies do not advertise their ci's for "ambiguous" candidates. they specifically state in their literature that implants are for those who have severe-profound or profound loss, 40% or less speech discrimination in the worse ear and 60% or less in the better ear.
 
by the way, tinnitus and recruitment do not automatically qualify someone for a ci nor should they.
 
deafdyke said:
Offhand, someone on one of my Hearing Aid related listservs has 80% hearing with hearing aids and he was thinking about getting implanted. Also back in the days of DumbNotes, I remember a poster who was a mom of two boys who were really good HA users got them both implanted. (they qualified b/c unaided they had a profound loss) Yes, I know..... ancedotes do not equate with data. I do think overall the gross majority of potential implantees aren't taking it lightly. I am not picking on anyone here. It does seem like most CI canidates seem to be totally off the bat canidates who need it. I do recall reading an article at Hearing Exchange that said that Nothing wrong with that. Matter of fact, if you completely and obviously need the surgery, and hearing aids really aren't helping all that much, then I think that insurance companies/ Medicaid should automaticly rubber stamp their approval for those surguries. This includes potential canidates who have things like severe tinitutas or recruitment.
Maybe the blip of ambigious canidates that I'm noticing actually equates with people who are somewhat wealthy or who have been drilled to think they NEED the latest hearing aid/CI. After all, the auditory-verbal methodology does tend to push "you gotta have the latest gizmo" thinking.
I have noticed that a lot of the ambigious canidates tend to be AG Bell members. (in other words people who tend to really go with improved technology) Like....I have noticed that some of the ambis get the CI to be able to "talk on the phone" or whatever sitution that doesn't have to do with one on one communication. (they ignore the fact that most just hoh folks have issues in those areas) I don't think that the ambis tend to out there in large numbers. ...it's just that they stand out more you know? It's hard to say really what the true stats are, since there seems to be a dearth of hard data out there. It really would be interesting to find out socilogical and other info on implantees.
Also, the hype about CIs for ambigious folks kind of reminds me of how AG Bell and audis were hyping up digital aids back in the 90's.
Maybe I'm just noticing abbrivant statistical bleeps. I do remember reading an article at Hearing Exchange that said that most people who were eligable for implantation weren't getting them.
Click to expand...

Good for her. She got her children a device that is much better in clarity and quality of sound. It will help them tremendiously.

The reason AG Bell people push implants is because they use spoken language. If a profoundly deaf person is to be able to access speech, they need a CI. It is the truth. VERY few profoundly deaf people are able to be aided into the "speech banana". Most of them rely heavily on lipreading, not on listening. CI's deliever speech intelligability to profoundly deaf people, hearing aids do not.
 
It is not easy to just run out and get implants. Don't forget insurance doesn't approve without cause. The out of pocket cost is high depending on if you have insurance. I'm still paying for my surgery and it was done in July 2007.

Can you defind an ambigious candidate?
Click to expand...
I'm aware of that. However, I do recall back when I was lurking at HealthyNormalHearingExchange, the administrator was encouraging someone who was looking into CI to " shop around" for a CI center that would implant her child. I am also kind of uncomfortable with the hypermarketing that seems to have come along with CI. For example, I have seen a lot of things like in a general "hearing health chat" people raving about CIs, to the point where it almost seems like they have Asperger's Syndrome about the CI. (and I do know of other people who were private messaged at the chat by someone going on and on about how they should get CI. I have also been personally randomly Imd by someone who kept going on and on about how I should get a CI b/c it's SO AWESOME!
I haven't noticed anything like that here.....which is awesome. People's stories here seem to be more down to earth. (ie I can hear some, but it's not something like a Sun Microsystems computer vs. an abucus)
Like, I have not noticed any hypermarketing akin to that which I've just described for a hearing aid or whatever.
Valee, I would describe an ambigious canidate as someone who gets quite a bit of speech perception with aids ( a la those boys I mentioned in my previous post) or someone who's speech scores fall between 40% and 60%.
I'm almost positive I have also read about people qualifying for CI based on the fact that their speech perception scores in noise are poor.
Like they are fine one on one, but b/c their speech scores are poor in noise, they got approved for CI.
Which brings me to my other point. Hear Again, there's nothing wrong per se with talking on the phone.....it's just that it seems like there is a subtype of people who while they are hoh, don't realize that you still have to deal with hoh issues being hoh. Plenty of just hoh people have difficulty in crowd situtions, or on the phone or whatever. (and besides as I recall, you got implanted b/c you were pretty much at the end of the line....talking on the phone is just a bonus for you. The person I was speaking of, did fine in all situtions except for talking on the phone. Big difference there) So they opt for CI, b/c to them it seems like one of those cars that does everything but bake cookies.
 
Wow...excellent advice.

Well, it's one more day until I find out what, if anything, I can do. Argh. The wait and anticipation is killin' me. LOL
 
deafdyke said:
I'm aware of that. However, I do recall back when I was lurking at HealthyNormalHearingExchange, the administrator was encouraging someone who was looking into CI to " shop around" for a CI center that would implant her child. I am also kind of uncomfortable with the hypermarketing that seems to have come along with CI. For example, I have seen a lot of things like in a general "hearing health chat" people raving about CIs, to the point where it almost seems like they have Asperger's Syndrome about the CI. (and I do know of other people who were private messaged at the chat by someone going on and on about how they should get CI. I have also been personally randomly Imd by someone who kept going on and on about how I should get a CI b/c it's SO AWESOME!
I haven't noticed anything like that here.....which is awesome. People's stories here seem to be more down to earth. (ie I can hear some, but it's not something like a Sun Microsystems computer vs. an abucus)
Like, I have not noticed any hypermarketing akin to that which I've just described for a hearing aid or whatever.
Valee, I would describe an ambigious canidate as someone who gets quite a bit of speech perception with aids ( a la those boys I mentioned in my previous post) or someone who's speech scores fall between 40% and 60%.
I'm almost positive I have also read about people qualifying for CI based on the fact that their speech perception scores in noise are poor.
Like they are fine one on one, but b/c their speech scores are poor in noise, they got approved for CI.
Which brings me to my other point. Hear Again, there's nothing wrong per se with talking on the phone.....it's just that it seems like there is a subtype of people who while they are hoh, don't realize that you still have to deal with hoh issues being hoh. Plenty of just hoh people have difficulty in crowd situtions, or on the phone or whatever. (and besides as I recall, you got implanted b/c you were pretty much at the end of the line....talking on the phone is just a bonus for you. The person I was speaking of, did fine in all situtions except for talking on the phone. Big difference there) So they opt for CI, b/c to them it seems like one of those cars that does everything but bake cookies.
Click to expand...

I think it is a great idea to get a second opinion if a doctor tells you that you child can not benefit from a device. I did that EXACT thing. I had an audiologist tell me they would not approve Miss Kat for a CI, so I found one who would. Doctors are not God, they can be wrong, so if you need to advocate for your child, do it.

For my daughter, the CI was a huge change. It was like going from a "abacus to a computer". She went from not understanding speech (except in very controlled, predetermined, closed sets) to actually overhearing and understanding, and being able to pick up words from conversations. She can learn from listening now. That is a huge difference.

And why should a person put up with 40-60% speech discrimination when they can have 90%? With the CI many people can get to that level, so why on earth should they be denied that? 40%, frankly, blows. That isn't enough to carry on a conversation.

Also, life ain't one on one. If a person can only function one on one, they aren't functioning. If they can improve their functioning to be able to hear in groups and in noise, why shouldn't they?

I still don't see why an improvement is a bad thing? Why should someone be denied better hearing if they want it? You still haven't explained that to me.
 
Appointment's tomorrow morning. Man I can't stand it...even if it's the same news as always at least I'll know for sure for the next few years until further advancements in HA technology are made.

But, I still can't stand it. :hmm:
 
as far as ci's are concerned, i'm of the opinion that even if someone who is hoh is only able to function well in a one-on-one environment, they should still qualify for a ci. the world is a noisy place and isn't designed to be quiet and secluded like a sound booth. expecting someone to rely on lipreading or function poorly in background noise is unfair -- especially since there is an alternative to help them hear. you're right dd in that when i considered a ci, i was at the end of the line in terms of amplification, but at the same time, i've heard of so many cases where people who've had 40%-60% speech discrimination are able to increase that to 90%-100% with ci's. i don't think there's anything wrong with that. as faire_jour said, why should someone have to accept only being able to hear well enough to "get by?"
 
HearAgain - Today has been a very exciting day. I'm exhausted, and barely have enough energy to post. LOL. Apparently I may be a good candidate for a CI. I was talking to my audiologist about this and he seems to be extremely optimistic about a CI helping my bad ear (and maybe even my good ear significantly). He was talking about people with my similar hearing loss that got CIs anyway, and gave me all the good and bad.

We won't know 100% until my audiogram in another week or so. It will help answer some remaining questions about the state of my current hearing loss. When we tested it last time, I was going through a bad ordeal that resulted in a complete loss of my hearing but it came back. I hit my head, which caused that episode. We're investigating some profound HAs as well. My audie is a biiiig fan of the Phonak Naidas and Unitron. His concern are #1: that they won't help me at all, and #2: that all I'll be able to pick up is environmental awareness of sound. That, and my left ear hasn't been used for over 25 years.

As a CI wearer, how is your hearing compared to hearing that you remember normally? How's music? How is speech discrimination?

In the span of a day going from "there's nothing that we can do" to "there IS a possibility of finally fixing this thing" is a little unreal. I don't think it's fully hit home yet that I may actually hear out of my left ear after nearly 25 years.

I'm kind of changing my position on CIs. If I can get close to normal hearing out of my ears with a CI, it's a small sacrifice to make, IMO.
 
Hi Phi4ius,

My hearing loss is profound (120db ski slop loss in left 95db in right) and i was born with those loss therefore doesn't have any memory of what sounds actually sounds like, I could only hear little of environmental sounds, standing next to Jumbo jets is quiet to me! I could not pick a word without visual. I had NO high freqencies at all just few dots at the bottom of the audio gram sloping down to zlich at about 800/1000hz. I was lucky enough to beable to speak very well through intensive speech therapy from when i was two until i left school at 16 and having a very stubborn/determined mother!
No HA on the market was enough, I went through 3 or 4 different types of HA's and still get no speech. I only got 40% for lipreading with voice, zlich without lipreading. I felt i could get more out of it so thought about having CI after seeing my friend go through one (menigitis at 5, Total deafness, CI at 19, huge change!). I went to first Ent which refused point blank and i was told i would get absolute no beneifit from having one because i was deaf too long and had no audiotry memory. So when i moved to new area (for work) I was refered to new ENT (this was 2 years after the first ENT), he was surprised that i spoke well so he asked me if i had thought about CI, I explained to him what happened. He said no harm in trying as i have nothing to loose. So he refered me, I was fast tracked, got CI within 6 months after appt with CI centre. It was mind boggling time but I had already thought about it for long time and kept the expectations low. The thing is that I had better hearing in my right ear and it's the ear they had implanted.. My left ear had been without ha for 14 years. They wanted to implant in the ear that already had stimulation from using HA. Although, I couldn't stand being without any sort of sound so i asked if they could put HA in my left ear... that was like needle in haystack to find the right one! I have Unitrion analouge tuned up to the max in my left ear and CI in right.

I was implanted at 30, the transformation is blown away! I was told i may get 5% improvement. My lipreading with voice at 3 month post switch on was 77%. They say it's bit early for me to do tests without visual but i have been on the phones to my Grandma, Brother, aunt. I am being to recongise the words only if i think about what they are going to say. This month is my 6 th month and i am due for 6 month review and i can't wait to see how i got on. I never really heard music pre Ci, now i have my Ipod :) and love it. My hearing with CI at 3 months is in the 30db range and i can hear small planes up in the sky!
I must say CI's isn't for everyone, You need to keep low expectations, determined to make it work, Use it properly, Patience because it will sound awful at first, Have lots of support at home. At and after switch on is very exhausting but it got better after few months.
It won't fix your hearing loss, there's chance it could not work (very small), at the end of the day you are still deaf with out it.

Good luck
 
I feel like I'm getting attacked a lot b/c I'm not all " CIs are AWESOME for everyone!" I'm not one of those anti-CI militants who is totally and completely anti-CI in every case. I'm just saying that there does need to be some discretion used in approving the ambigous cases. Not all implantees hear at a mild loss level you know. The hearing gained can be all over the map from envioromental sound awareness to functionally hoh.
I think if an ambigious canidate clearly demonstrates in soundbooth conditions that hearing aids aren't doing the job....(and that means that the soundbooth tests would be conducted with hearing aids) then YES.....they should be able to get implanted. I also think that if they have an uneven loss, then maybe a good idea would be to limit them to one CI, and one HA.
The thing is, our discussion is basicly moot b/c unfortunatly audilogy is a very hit or miss science. It's hard to tell who will benifit well from different kinds of hearing assitance. That is pretty much a fact. I do think that some of the ambigious canidates might benifit from some of the newer HAs. Maybe for an ambigious canidate an intensive hearing aid clinic might be a good idea. Like an audi could have the ambigous client try all different hearing aids in the soundbooth, and then try out the best ones in the real world. Some of them might qualify for CI after that......but others might find out that a powerful hearing aid does wonders for their hearing.
And I think that people have the right to be able to hear well.....but it does seem like a lot of the ambigious canidates are wanting to be implanted b/c they are experiacing all the disadvantages that virtually ALL hoh people encounter on a day to day basis. See what I mean?
 
dd,

just because someone "only" hears environmental sounds with a ci doesn't mean that isn't considered successful. in many cases, those who hear environmental sounds hear them *much* better with a ci than they ever did with hearing aids.
 
dd,

if an "ambiguous candidate" demonstrates the fact that they can't benefit from hearing aids, then they are not considered to be an "ambiguous candidate."
ci candidates are ci candidates -- period.
 
dd,

what you are requesting ci audi's to do (i.e. have prospective ci candidates try the latest hearing aids in the real world) already happens. it's called a 6 month hearing aid trial period.
 
dd,

to be honest, i don't see what you mean because you can't compare ALL hoh people to those of us who no longer benefit from hearing aids. while it is true that some people who are hoh have difficulty understanding speech in noise, the majority of them don't which is why they aren't considered ci candidates in the first place. please don't compare "most" hoh people to the relatively few who decide to opt for a ci because in doing so, you're comparing apples to oranges.
 
Phi4Sius said:
HearAgain - Today has been a very exciting day. I'm exhausted, and barely have enough energy to post. LOL. Apparently I may be a good candidate for a CI. I was talking to my audiologist about this and he seems to be extremely optimistic about a CI helping my bad ear (and maybe even my good ear significantly). He was talking about people with my similar hearing loss that got CIs anyway, and gave me all the good and bad.

We won't know 100% until my audiogram in another week or so. It will help answer some remaining questions about the state of my current hearing loss. When we tested it last time, I was going through a bad ordeal that resulted in a complete loss of my hearing but it came back. I hit my head, which caused that episode. We're investigating some profound HAs as well. My audie is a biiiig fan of the Phonak Naidas and Unitron. His concern are #1: that they won't help me at all, and #2: that all I'll be able to pick up is environmental awareness of sound. That, and my left ear hasn't been used for over 25 years.

As a CI wearer, how is your hearing compared to hearing that you remember normally? How's music? How is speech discrimination?

In the span of a day going from "there's nothing that we can do" to "there IS a possibility of finally fixing this thing" is a little unreal. I don't think it's fully hit home yet that I may actually hear out of my left ear after nearly 25 years.

I'm kind of changing my position on CIs. If I can get close to normal hearing out of my ears with a CI, it's a small sacrifice to make, IMO.
Click to expand...

that's wonderful news! congratulations! :D

prior to receiving my ci's, i had 8% speech discrimination in my left ear (with hearing aids and a comtek fm system) and 22% speech discrimination in my right ear (with hearing aids and a comtek fm system). for the most part, i was only able to hear environmental sounds with my hearing aids with the exception of some vowel sounds in my right ear. however, that didn't help when it came to understanding speech, so i relied on tactile interpreters and alternative communication methods for the deafblind.

ever since getting my first ci, my speech discrimination increased from 8%/22% to 90%-100%. in background noise, i hear at 90% and in quiet one-on-one situations, i hear at 100%.

when it comes to my audiogram, without hearing aids i started to hear at 90 dB with my right ear with no measurable hearing aided or unaided at 1000 Hz or above. with my left ear, i started hearing at 95 dB with no measureable hearing aided or unaided at 1000 Hz and above.

when it came to my aided thresholds, my dB's began at 60 dB and dropped from there at the middle and high frequencies with no response at 1000 Hz and above.

as far as my ci hearing is concerned, i'm able to hear low frequencies at 15 dB, middle frequencies at 20 dB and high frequencies at 30 dB. not bad if you ask me! :)

good luck with your ci journey and if you ever have further questions about ci's, do not hesitate to ask!
 
Back
Top