Cognitive processing speed improvement after cochlear implantation

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-09-18 DOI:10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444330
Isabelle Mosnier, Joël Belmin, Domenico Cuda, Raquel Manrique Huarte, Mathieu Marx, Angel Ramos Macias, Riad Khnifes, Ohad Hilly, Roberto Bovo, Chris J. James, Petra L. Graham, Paula Greenham
{"title":"Cognitive processing speed improvement after cochlear implantation","authors":"Isabelle Mosnier, Joël Belmin, Domenico Cuda, Raquel Manrique Huarte, Mathieu Marx, Angel Ramos Macias, Riad Khnifes, Ohad Hilly, Roberto Bovo, Chris J. James, Petra L. Graham, Paula Greenham","doi":"10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundUntreated hearing loss has an effect on cognition. It is hypothesized that the additional processing required to compensate for the sensory loss affects the cognitive resources available for other tasks and that this could be mitigated by a hearing device.MethodsThe impact on cognition of cochlear implants (CIs) was tested in 100 subjects, ≥60 years old, with bilateral moderately-severe to profound post linguistic deafness using hearing aids. Data was compared pre and 12 and 18 months after cochlear implantation for the speech spatial qualities questionnaire, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Trail making test B (TMTB) and digit symbol coding (DSC) from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale version IV and finally the timed up and go test (TUG). Subjects were divided into young old (60–64), middle old (65–75) and old old (75+) groups. Cognitive test scores and times were standardized according to available normative data.ResultsHearing significantly improved pre- to post-operatively across all age groups. There was no change post-implant in outcomes for TMTB, TUG or MMSE tests. Age-corrected values were within normal expectations for all age groups for the TUG and MMSE. However, DSC scores and TMTB times were worse than normal. There was a significant increase in DSC scores between baseline and 12-months for 60- to 64-year-olds (<jats:italic>t</jats:italic>[153] = 2.608, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.027), which remained at 18 months (<jats:italic>t</jats:italic>[153] = 2.663, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.023).DiscussionThe improved attention and processing speed in the youngest age group may be a consequence of reallocation of cognitive resources away from auditory processing due to greatly improved hearing. The oldest age group of participants had cognition scores closest to normal values, suggesting that only the most able older seniors tend to come forward for a CI. Severe to profoundly deaf individuals with hearing aids or cochlear implants were still poorer than age-equivalent normally hearing individuals with respect to cognitive flexibility, attention, working memory, processing speed and visuoperceptual functions. Due to a lack of data for the TUG, TMTB and DSC in the literature for hearing impaired individuals, the results reported here provide an important set of reference data for use in future research.","PeriodicalId":12450,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444330","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundUntreated hearing loss has an effect on cognition. It is hypothesized that the additional processing required to compensate for the sensory loss affects the cognitive resources available for other tasks and that this could be mitigated by a hearing device.MethodsThe impact on cognition of cochlear implants (CIs) was tested in 100 subjects, ≥60 years old, with bilateral moderately-severe to profound post linguistic deafness using hearing aids. Data was compared pre and 12 and 18 months after cochlear implantation for the speech spatial qualities questionnaire, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Trail making test B (TMTB) and digit symbol coding (DSC) from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale version IV and finally the timed up and go test (TUG). Subjects were divided into young old (60–64), middle old (65–75) and old old (75+) groups. Cognitive test scores and times were standardized according to available normative data.ResultsHearing significantly improved pre- to post-operatively across all age groups. There was no change post-implant in outcomes for TMTB, TUG or MMSE tests. Age-corrected values were within normal expectations for all age groups for the TUG and MMSE. However, DSC scores and TMTB times were worse than normal. There was a significant increase in DSC scores between baseline and 12-months for 60- to 64-year-olds (t[153] = 2.608, p = 0.027), which remained at 18 months (t[153] = 2.663, p = 0.023).DiscussionThe improved attention and processing speed in the youngest age group may be a consequence of reallocation of cognitive resources away from auditory processing due to greatly improved hearing. The oldest age group of participants had cognition scores closest to normal values, suggesting that only the most able older seniors tend to come forward for a CI. Severe to profoundly deaf individuals with hearing aids or cochlear implants were still poorer than age-equivalent normally hearing individuals with respect to cognitive flexibility, attention, working memory, processing speed and visuoperceptual functions. Due to a lack of data for the TUG, TMTB and DSC in the literature for hearing impaired individuals, the results reported here provide an important set of reference data for use in future research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工耳蜗植入后认知处理速度的提高
背景未经治疗的听力损失会影响认知能力。方法对 100 名年龄≥ 60 岁、使用助听器的双侧中重度至重度语言后耳聋患者进行了人工耳蜗植入对认知影响的测试。比较了人工耳蜗植入前、植入 12 个月和 18 个月后的言语空间素质问卷、迷你精神状态检查(MMSE)、韦氏成人智力量表第四版中的 "走小路测试 B"(TMTB)和 "数字符号编码"(DSC),以及最后的 "定时起立行走测试"(TUG)。受试者被分为青年组(60-64 岁)、中年组(65-75 岁)和老年组(75 岁以上)。结果所有年龄组的听力从术前到术后都有明显改善。植入后,TMTB、TUG 或 MMSE 测试结果没有变化。所有年龄组的 TUG 和 MMSE 年龄校正值均在正常预期范围内。但是,DSC 评分和 TMTB 时间比正常值差。在基线和 12 个月期间,60 至 64 岁年龄组的 DSC 分数有明显提高(t[153] = 2.608,p = 0.027),在 18 个月时仍有提高(t[153] = 2.663,p = 0.023)。年龄最大的参与者的认知分数最接近正常值,这表明只有最有能力的老年人才会选择植入人工耳蜗。在认知灵活性、注意力、工作记忆、处理速度和视觉感知功能方面,佩戴助听器或植入人工耳蜗的重度至极重度聋人仍然比同等年龄的正常听力者差。由于文献中缺乏针对听障人士的 TUG、TMTB 和 DSC 数据,本文报告的结果为今后的研究提供了一组重要的参考数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-NEUROSCIENCES
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
1426
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research that advances our understanding of the mechanisms of Central Nervous System aging and age-related neural diseases. Specialty Chief Editor Thomas Wisniewski at the New York University School of Medicine is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Somatosensory integration in robot-assisted motor restoration post-stroke. Association of serum klotho with cognitive function among individuals with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Causal association between Parkinson's disease and cancer: a bidirectional Mendelian randomization study. Network-based statistics reveals an enhanced subnetwork in prefrontal cortex in mild cognitive impairment: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study. Editorial: Dance, embodied agency and neuroplasticity in aging.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1