How much better with CI over Aids

I have a question for all of you and I want some opinions from you.

I made an apt to get tube replaced on my mold and they told me that I get free hearing test and tubing since I am a new patient. I scored 40% in verbal where she speaks the words to me and I respond. My husband told me that majority of the words he spoke through the Mic I said different words. I know that my hearing is gradually dropping.

Now I only wear one aid in my left ear and my right ear is like a dead ear. I can hear voices if I had an aid but cannot make out words etc. Many times when I met with my audi she would ask if I would consider CI. I turn it down every time cause I hate wired hanging in front of me with a box etc. So much has changed in over 4 years since my last apt.

Now my question to you is those that wore hearing aids for many years and then get CI.

How well did you pick up words without looking at the person wearing the aids and CI. Which one did you do much better in.

I am thinking of going ahead and getting one for my right ear first since that is the worst ear then decide on my left.
 

drphil

Active Member
Angel: First Cochlear Implants are considered when a person doesn't hear at all with their Hearing Aid.

aside: I had Phonak LL6 for many years. I lost all hearing in my right ear in 1991. Lost in 2006- left ear. I was in the Profound lost category for many years
Considered and accepted for a Cochlear Implant in early 2007. To date a substantial improvemnet in hearing.

Much success in improving your hearing.
 
Last edited:

drphil

Active Member
:D :wave:Hi Angel: In my past experience-I didn't hear anything in my right ear since 1991. I still used my Hearing aid for the left ear- till I became bilateral DEAF in 2006.

Thus the start of determining if a Cochlear Implant was "suitable". It was. Thus the operation in July 2007.

Again much success in your immediate consideration.

further aside: since 1984 Sunnybrook/Cochlear Implant section has examined 3000 adult patients. 2000 were deemed "unsuitable" for Implantation. Only a thousand could be Implanted of which 18 didn't benefit from their Implant. Source: patients meeting last year.
 
Last edited:

cdmeggers

Well-Known Member
the CI experience is going to be different for everyone. I had my left ear (which is my dead ear) implanted 2.5 years ago. I still struggle to understand speech with it, but that's because it's been 25 years since I last heard real sounds with the left ear, so it takes longer for my brain to make sense of things. I still wear a hearing aid on my right ear, but even with both CI and HA, I'm struggling. Am hoping to get a CI in my right ear some day.
 

deafdyke

Well-Known Member
Did you have a progressive loss with aids? If you did, that means you'd be a really good CI user....I think implanting the right ear is an excellent idea.
I would be very careful in assuming that a CI will give you extremely high "like hearing" performance (ie hearing without speechreading)....Even hearing people speechread...
It might give you better speech perception then a HA ever did....but I think the consencous is that the CI works differently for different people.......
 

drphil

Active Member
Angel: consider very carefully "deafdyke" last sentence: because each of us have "different" Hearing loss characteristics hard to generalize to anyone else-especially on computers.
The actual experience of Sunnybrook Cochlear Implant section-validates that.
 
Angel: First Cochlear Implants are considered when a person doesn't hear at all with their Hearing Aid.

This is incorrect. Cochlear Implants are considered when the loss has hit a threshold for speech perception. At the time of my surgery, I still heard environmental sounds and vowels. I was never without hearing at all at any point. I actually qualified for years prior to that point, but was under a lot of wrong impressions, including the idea that you must be without any hearing at all.
 
I am thinking of going ahead and getting one for my right ear first since that is the worst ear then decide on my left.

On the topic of speech perception without speech reading, that will depend on whether you have ever had that ability in the first place and you also have to be mindful of your own habits. You've been speech reading for years, so even though you may have the ability to hear the full range of speech again... you'll go with habit. That is why it is necessary to engage in regular auditory rehab.

As for which ear, if your doctor recommends the left ear, and don't be surprised if they do.. then I would suggest you follow that recommendation if you are looking to experience maximal results. If you are thinking you will ultimately go bilateral, then one benefit to going with the right ear would be that you'd rehab it (assuming you do not use an aid in your left/dominant ear to force your brain to focus on your right) and then when you do your left ear it would be easier to just enjoy it without forcing yourself to rehab.

Look at cdmeggers, since she did her worst ear first, she will be free to just run with her better ear when she does get it implanted. It's like running uphill vs running downhill. Get the harder work out of the way first.
 

deafdyke

Well-Known Member
it may not be realistic to expect high speech perception without speechreading....Even most late deafened people use pretty much ALL the ALDs, and other HOH accomondations such as closed captions and stuff like that....
If the "hearing" from technology is so good, then how come pretty much ALL users of CIs/HAs still use almost all the same traditional dhh accomondations?
 
it may not be realistic to expect high speech perception without speechreading....Even most late deafened people use pretty much ALL the ALDs, and other HOH accomondations such as closed captions and stuff like that....
If the "hearing" from technology is so good, then how come pretty much ALL users of CIs/HAs still use almost all the same traditional dhh accomondations?

You need to cite that URL that you were asked for last week.

The difference between someone using an ALD like an FM or loop system is that someone with a severe-profound loss using a hearing aid will be heavily relying on lip reading while listening to those vowels in their ear. A CI user using the same ALD is not reading lips at all or significantly less than the HA user and is exerting much less effort.

User performance varies, but in general most CI users who previously had speech regain significantly improved speech perception.

That's what is so great about it. Oh, and personally. . My ALDs come down to captions, which I do not use for live broadcasts because I do not need them, and a bed shaker. Captions are a long-time habit at this point and when watching shows such as Game of Thrones that are full of names of people and places that no one would know how to spell, they come in handy. They also make for a more focused viewing experience. I have also found that those with normal hearing also begin to prefer captions once they get used to them and notice the difference in the viewing experience. I haven't used a relay service since activation.

What we actually see is initially users think they will need a bunch of ALDs and then realize they don't don't need them anymore.
 
Last edited:

HOH-ME

Member
Angel: First Cochlear Implants are considered when a person doesn't hear at all with their Hearing Aid.

aside: I had Phonak LL6 for many years. I lost all hearing in my right ear in 1991. Lost in 2006- left ear. I was in the Profound lost category for many years
Considered and accepted for a Cochlear Implant in early 2007. To date a substantial improvemnet in hearing.

Much success in improving your hearing.

That is not true at all. The base requirement for CI qualifications is 50% or less aided speech recognition scores. My speech scores were in the 27-30% range with my HA's, the are now in the 90+% range with my CI's.

it may not be realistic to expect high speech perception without speechreading....Even most late deafened people use pretty much ALL the ALDs, and other HOH accomondations such as closed captions and stuff like that....
If the "hearing" from technology is so good, then how come pretty much ALL users of CIs/HAs still use almost all the same traditional dhh accomondations?

Most people I know, especially those late deafened like myself, need no accommodations or lip-reading to function with Ci's. I can hear nearly perfectly on the phone now, can understand 90+% of speech--most recent scores are 98% and 100% :D, 80% in noise--tested formally. The only time I use lip-reading any more is if I don't have my processors on :D. I never use CC's. I use my ComPilot to watch movies on my computer but that is mostly so I can do that in the same room where my husband is watching something on TV. I can understand what they are saying on TV without any assistance. Heck, last night I was only using one CI and could understand tv just fine, thanks. You are just flat out wrong with your assumptions, sorry.

CountryGirl23--the only complaint I have about my CI's is that I wish I would have done them sooner. They have been just wonderful. I have a life again. I can go to restaurants and have conversations again--and often I hear better than those around me with "normal" hearing. I've been to several movies and have zero issues understanding what people are saying--even in animated movies with zero options to read lips :D. With my HA's, I just didn't use the phone and actually had to retire from my job because it required a lot of phone use. I have no issues on the phone now at all. I never use CC's or sign language. I've had my CI's for about a year now and so thankful that the option was presented to me and I took advantage of them. I was like you and still had some hearing and thought that they were only for people that could not hear at all. A friend of mine got me in contact with someone that works in a CI center and at her urging, I looked into the options more. I am SOOOOO glad I did!!
 

drphil

Active Member
HOH ME: In December 2006- I tested at a loss level of 105db. I heard nothing. My Hearing aid showed that-nothing. Yeah real quiet!
aside: that is why I was considered for a Cochlear Implant which was implanted on July 12, 2007. I was accepted.
Whether there is a different criteria used at Sunnybrook/Toronto- no idea. Also they have deemed 2000 tested adults since 1984-unsuitable. Thus 1000 were suitable.
Actual results given last year a patients meeting.

Phones: I hear the dial tone but not anyone speaking-with my implant. So I just continued using my UltraTect 1140 VCO telephone. I understand from Sunnybrook/Toronto in their experience- one out of 2 can use a regular phone with their Implant.
 
Last edited:

Jane B.

Well-Known Member
HOH ME: In December 2006- I tested at a loss level of 105db. I heard nothing. My Hearing aid showed that-nothing. Yeah real quiet!
aside: that is why I was considered for a Cochlear Implant which was implanted on July 12, 2007. I was accepted.
Whether there is a different criteria used at Sunnybrook/Toronto- no idea. Also they have deemed 2000 tested adults since 1984-unsuitable. Thus 1000 were suitable.
Actual results given last year a patients meeting.

Phones: I hear the dial tone but not anyone speaking-with my implant. So I just continued using my UltraTect 1140 VCO telephone. I understand from Sunnybrook/Toronto in their experience- one out of 2 can use a regular phone with their Implant.

drphil
I know the years can really fly by. But, I just checked it and your implant was done 7 years ago. The way things change in the medical world the tech has changed and the criteria probably has as well. That is besides the differences from center to center and country to country.
 

drphil

Active Member
It is true "medical kowledge increases as with surgical techniques" Cochlear Implant "improvements" over time. At what point does a person -now is the time for the operation? Also, what happens in the meantime waiting for "perfect Implant?

However does that impact on any specfic person considering Cochlear Implants?

Also: one person is at specific centre and specific doctor usually doesn't
go "shopping" for Cochlear Implants at centres not nearby or other countries.

Whether a person actually understands all matters relative to the Cochlear Implant as well as the surgical techniques employed excluding"computer comments" can be "discussed". Is this hypothesis real?


More comments in AllDeaf.com
 
Last edited:

HOH-ME

Member
It is true "medical kowledge increases as with surgical techniques" Cochlear Implant "improvements" over time. At hwat point does a person -now is the time for the operation?

However does that impact on any specfic person considering Cochlear Implants?

Also: one person is at specific centre and specific doctor usually doesn't
go "shopping" for Cochlear Implants at centres not nearby or other countries.

Whether a person actually understands all matters relative to the Cochlear Implant as well as the surgical techniques employed excluding"computer comments" can be "discussed". Is this hypothesis real?


More comments in AllDeaf.com

Well, I guess this is just another reason I am SO glad I don't have socialized medicine. First, I'm bilateral, not an option for you as I understand it. Second, I have newer implants and better equipment, so that does matter. I have a Naida and Neptune and while they are both new, there are significant differences in sound quality between the two, so your 7+ year old processors need to be upgraded--if you can. Third, how much rehab did you do, how often do you go in/did you go in for mappings to fine tune? Fourth, I most certainly did shop for doctors and centers. I had 4 centers to choose from within an hour drive of my house. I got recommendations from non CI ENT's as well as CI users. I understand that is not an option for you, however. Yes, your limited exposure and availability to quality care will impact your results...

It is also the case in Canada that they will only do X number of implants each year, so, only the really bad cases get the implants after waiting years :D. That is not the case in the US :D.
 
I have a Naida and Neptune and while they are both new, there are significant differences in sound quality between the two, so your 7+ year old processors need to be upgraded--if you can. .

There is no real difference in sound quality between the two. The difference is in the use of the Tmic vs the use of the headpiece mic or more accurately.. the difference in the location of the mics. So as far as the ability of each processor to do the job.. they both are equal. Naida obviously has many more features.
 

HOH-ME

Member
There is no real difference in sound quality between the two. The difference is in the use of the Tmic vs the use of the headpiece mic or more accurately.. the difference in the location of the mics. So as far as the ability of each processor to do the job.. they both are equal. Naida obviously has many more features.

I disagree..with the features on the Naida, the sound is much more crisp, clear and "normal". The Neptune is fine and I use it quite often, but it's not as good as the Naida...and they are both better than the Harmony based on other people's experience with both.
 
It is true "medical kowledge increases as with surgical techniques" Cochlear Implant "improvements" over time. At hwat point does a person -now is the time for the operation?

By seeing the appropriate specialist.

Only 7% of the people who are qualified for an implant are currently implanted. That's a whole lot of people who do not know they qualify or are mislead into thinking qualifying means when "you do not hear at all."
 
Top