Advanced search
1 file | 1.03 MB Add to list

Examining the impact of cochlear implantation on the early gross motor development of children with a hearing loss

Alexandra De Kegel (UGent) , Leen Maes (UGent) , Hilde Van Waelvelde (UGent) and Ingeborg Dhooge (UGent)
(2015) EAR AND HEARING. 36(3). p.e113-e121
Author
Organization
Abstract
Objective: As deaf children are now implanted at a very early age, the influence of a cochlear implant (CI) on the early motor development of children with a hearing loss becomes relevant. Design: Forty-eight children with a hearing loss were included in this controlled prospective follow-up study and were subdivided into a CI group (n = 23) receiving a CI during the follow-up period and a control group (n = 25) receiving no CI during the follow-up period. All children were assessed around the ages of 6 (T1), 12 (T2), 18 (T3), and 24 (T4) months with a motor test battery consisting of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2 (PDMS-2), Alberta Infant Motor Scales (AIMS) (only at T1 and T2), and Ghent Developmental Balance Test (GDBT) (only at T3 and T4). In addition, collic vestibular-evoked myogenic potential testing was performed in all children. Group differences in PDMS-2 Gross Motor Quotient (GMQ), Fine Motor Quotient, AIMS z score, and GDBT z score were analyzed using Linear Mixed Model (LMM) analysis for repeated measures. Results: For PDMS-2 GMQ, the LMM revealed significant effects for group (p = 0.04), test moment (p < 0.001), and for the interaction between these two factors (p = 0.035). Contrasts indicated that the CI group showed a greater deterioration in PDMS-2 GMQ between T2 and T3 compared with that showed by the control group (p = 0.002). The LMM for PDMS-2 Fine Motor Quotient and AIMS z score showed no significant effects. For GDBT z score, the LMM pointed out significant effects for group (p = 0.013) and test moment (p < 0.001), but no significant interaction between these two factors. Contrasts indicated that the CI group performed significantly weaker than the control group at both test moments (T3 and T4; all p < 0.012) and that both groups showed a significant recovery in GDBTz scores between T3 and T4 (all p < 0.012). Conclusions: This study shows that the trajectory of gross motor development can be changed in children with a hearing loss after a cochlear implantation. Implanted children show a drop in their gross motor performance within the age range of 6 to 18 months, at which period the majority of the implantations took place, with a tendency of recovery toward the age of 2 years. However, longer follow-up will be necessary to trace whether the implanted children catch up their motor delay in comparison with nonimplanted children with a hearing loss at later age.
Keywords
Motor development, Cochlear implants, Vestibular disorders, EVOKED MYOGENIC POTENTIALS, CONGENITAL CYTOMEGALOVIRUS-INFECTION, VESTIBULAR FUNCTION, DEAF-CHILDREN, IMPAIRED CHILDREN, SACCULAR FUNCTION, DYSFUNCTION, INFANTS, RELIABILITY, DEFICITS

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.03 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
De Kegel, Alexandra, Leen Maes, Hilde Van Waelvelde, et al. “Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children with a Hearing Loss.” EAR AND HEARING 36.3 (2015): e113–e121. Print.
APA
De Kegel, A., Maes, L., Van Waelvelde, H., & Dhooge, I. (2015). Examining the impact of cochlear implantation on the early gross motor development of children with a hearing loss. EAR AND HEARING, 36(3), e113–e121.
Chicago author-date
De Kegel, Alexandra, Leen Maes, Hilde Van Waelvelde, and Ingeborg Dhooge. 2015. “Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children with a Hearing Loss.” Ear and Hearing 36 (3): e113–e121.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
De Kegel, Alexandra, Leen Maes, Hilde Van Waelvelde, and Ingeborg Dhooge. 2015. “Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children with a Hearing Loss.” Ear and Hearing 36 (3): e113–e121.
Vancouver
1.
De Kegel A, Maes L, Van Waelvelde H, Dhooge I. Examining the impact of cochlear implantation on the early gross motor development of children with a hearing loss. EAR AND HEARING. 2015;36(3):e113–e121.
IEEE
[1]
A. De Kegel, L. Maes, H. Van Waelvelde, and I. Dhooge, “Examining the impact of cochlear implantation on the early gross motor development of children with a hearing loss,” EAR AND HEARING, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. e113–e121, 2015.
@article{5791560,
  abstract     = {Objective: As deaf children are now implanted at a very early age, the influence of a cochlear implant (CI) on the early motor development of children with a hearing loss becomes relevant. 
Design: Forty-eight children with a hearing loss were included in this controlled prospective follow-up study and were subdivided into a CI group (n = 23) receiving a CI during the follow-up period and a control group (n = 25) receiving no CI during the follow-up period. All children were assessed around the ages of 6 (T1), 12 (T2), 18 (T3), and 24 (T4) months with a motor test battery consisting of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2 (PDMS-2), Alberta Infant Motor Scales (AIMS) (only at T1 and T2), and Ghent Developmental Balance Test (GDBT) (only at T3 and T4). In addition, collic vestibular-evoked myogenic potential testing was performed in all children. Group differences in PDMS-2 Gross Motor Quotient (GMQ), Fine Motor Quotient, AIMS z score, and GDBT z score were analyzed using Linear Mixed Model (LMM) analysis for repeated measures. 
Results: For PDMS-2 GMQ, the LMM revealed significant effects for group (p = 0.04), test moment (p < 0.001), and for the interaction between these two factors (p = 0.035). Contrasts indicated that the CI group showed a greater deterioration in PDMS-2 GMQ between T2 and T3 compared with that showed by the control group (p = 0.002). The LMM for PDMS-2 Fine Motor Quotient and AIMS z score showed no significant effects. For GDBT z score, the LMM pointed out significant effects for group (p = 0.013) and test moment (p < 0.001), but no significant interaction between these two factors. Contrasts indicated that the CI group performed significantly weaker than the control group at both test moments (T3 and T4; all p < 0.012) and that both groups showed a significant recovery in GDBTz scores between T3 and T4 (all p < 0.012). 
Conclusions: This study shows that the trajectory of gross motor development can be changed in children with a hearing loss after a cochlear implantation. Implanted children show a drop in their gross motor performance within the age range of 6 to 18 months, at which period the majority of the implantations took place, with a tendency of recovery toward the age of 2 years. However, longer follow-up will be necessary to trace whether the implanted children catch up their motor delay in comparison with nonimplanted children with a hearing loss at later age.},
  author       = {De Kegel, Alexandra and Maes, Leen and Van Waelvelde, Hilde and Dhooge, Ingeborg},
  issn         = {0196-0202},
  journal      = {EAR AND HEARING},
  keywords     = {Motor development,Cochlear implants,Vestibular disorders,EVOKED MYOGENIC POTENTIALS,CONGENITAL CYTOMEGALOVIRUS-INFECTION,VESTIBULAR FUNCTION,DEAF-CHILDREN,IMPAIRED CHILDREN,SACCULAR FUNCTION,DYSFUNCTION,INFANTS,RELIABILITY,DEFICITS},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3},
  pages        = {e113--e121},
  title        = {Examining the impact of cochlear implantation on the early gross motor development of children with a hearing loss},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000133},
  volume       = {36},
  year         = {2015},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: