The proposed study will investigate whether an auditory brain training program can improve cochlear implant (CI) outcomes in older post-lingually deafened CI users. The study will evaluate the potential benefit of training on speech recognition performance, psychosocial and cognitive function.
Optimizing Speech Recognition and Cognitive Outcomes for Older Cochlear Implant Users with Auditory-Brain Training is evaluating the performance of older cochlear implant users completing a customized auditory-cognitive brain training program. The goal is to determine the effectiveness of training based on speech recognition, neural responses, cognitive, and psychosocial function. Successful training could result in improved outcomes for communication and cognition, new client-centered care models, and better consumer access to effective training. Specifically, investigators will assess two training programs to determine whether participants can improve speech understanding and speed, attention and memory, and communication in daily life. Thirty participants will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: auditory-brain training or non-auditory brain training. Participants will complete two hours of training online at home or office. Participants will meet virtually with a clinician weekly to discuss progress.The study will help determine the best training methods for older adult cochlear implant users.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
30
Treatment Participants will complete 8 weeks of training for 2 hours per week and participate in a 1 hour meeting with clinician. Participants with spend 1 hour auditory training use Angel Sound and one hour of auditory cognitive training using auditory portions of Posit Science. A clinical paradigm including reviewing results, providing strategies and positive feedback and strategies in the 1 hour virtual meeting of clinician and participant. Practice for next week is assigned. Control group intervention follows the same time and procedure but the materials are non-auditory puzzles (Sudoku, Cross Word Puzzles, Spot the Difference, Ken-Ken and Word Search).
Participant will complete 8 weeks of training for 2 hours per week and participate in a 1 hour meeting with clinician. Control group intervention follows the same time and clinical paradigm, but the materials are non-auditory puzzles (Sudoku, Cross Word Puzzles, Spot the Difference, Ken-Ken and Word Search).
Gallaudet University
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States
RECRUITINGCenter for Hearing and Communication
New York, New York, United States
RECRUITINGVanderbilt University
Nashville, Tennessee, United States
RECRUITINGAZBio Sentence Test (Spahr A, Dorman M, Gilles,A et al (2012)
Repeat sentences; % score of words repeated correctly; 0-100%; higher is better
Time frame: Change from baseline AZBio Sentence Test scores at one-week post training. Change from baseline AZBio scores at 2 months post training.
Client Orientated Scale of Improvement (COSI) Dillon H, James A , Ginis J, et al.(1997)
Questionnaire rating for hearing ability pre and post treatment 10-95%; higher is better
Time frame: Change from baseline COSI score at one-week post training. Change from baseline COSI score at 2 months post training.
Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL) McRacken,T (2019) McRackan T, Hand B; Velozo CA, Dubno J. (2019) Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL)(CIQOL-10 Global). J Speech Lang Hear Res. 62(9
Questionnaire measuring quality of life with hearing loss. Scores 1-5; higher is better
Time frame: Change from baseline CIQOL score at one-week post training. Change from baseline CIQOL score at 2 months post training.
Raven Progressive Matrices Test. (2009).
Test of nonverbal reasoning. Scores number matrices completed from 0-60 matrices; higher is better.
Time frame: Change from baseline Raven Progressive Matrices Test score at one-week post training. Change from baseline Raven Progressive Matrices Test score at 2 months post training.
Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status for Hearing Impaired Individuals (RBANS-H). Claes A, Mertens G, Gilles A et al. (2016).
Test of cognitive function adapted and normed for persons with hearing loss. Scores range from 40-160; higher is better.
Time frame: Change from baseline Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS-H) scores at one-week post training. Change from RBANS-H baseline at 2 months.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Revised Hearing Handicap Inventory and Screening Tool based on Psychometric Reevaluation of the Hearing Handicap Inventories for the Elderly and Adults (RHHI). Cassarly C, Matthews L, Simpson A et al.( 2020)
Questionnaire to assess perceived hearing handicap associated with a hearing loss or effects of hearing loss on an individual's quality of life. Scores range from 0 to100 with 0-52 for emotional sub-scale and 0-48 for social-situational; lower scores are better.
Time frame: Change from baseline RHHI scores at 1-week post training. Change from baseline RHHI scores at 2 months post training.
Trail Making Test (TMT) Sánchez-Cubillo I, Periáñez JA, Adrover-Roig D, et al. (2009)
Test of cognitive abilities. Scores time to completion; lower is better.
Time frame: Change from baseline Trail Making Test scores at 1-week post training, at 2 months post training. at 2 months post training.
Neural Response to sound Electrophysological response to sound.
Electrophysiological response to measure brain's electrical activity to sounds. Latency and amplitude changes recorded. Increased amplitude and reduced latency are better.
Time frame: Change in amplitude and latency scores at 1-week post training. Change from baseline at 2 months post training