Audiologist Just Told Me I'm A Possible Candidate

Just found the doctor's email on internet and let's hope it doesn't bounce.
 
deafskeptic said:
I'm kinda embrassed to say this but I want to let my doctor know what implant I want and my parents are like let the experts decide. They aren't being of much help on this.

Well what do the experts know of what sort of situations I have to deal with on a daily basis? I have no idea how to contact my doctor or my audie. I tried to email a member of my doctor staff but my mail bounced.

I want to let them know that I want the Nucleus Freedom and that the HiRes is my second choice.
Click to expand...

You should be able to state what you prefer have for your CI. Unless you are not of age, this shouldn't be an issue. Let your Audi know your preference and go from there. There maybe something going on here that we don't know about. I hope you get it all settled soon.
 
Well I'm glad you and I agree Hear Again!
Do you also think that people should experiment with different technologies before opting for bilaterals? I just think that bilaterals should be reserved for the absolute worst cases, and that most implantees should experiment. There are some people who are "right off the bat" canidates.....like I believe that people with auditory nereopathy should automaticly get bilaterals, no questions asked. I just think that b/c results are so indivdual, that bilateral implantee canidates should experiment with other technology in their better ear, unless of course testing indicates absolutly NO benifit whatsoever from traditional( hearing aids) and alternative (eg body worn aid, those high frequncy transponders) I mean I know a girl who had NO benifit (not even enviormental!) from '80's (including body worns!) and 90's types of hearing aids. She recently tried hearing aids again, and she's been getting SPEECH perception from her aids!
 
I really hadn't expected to hear from Dr. Pillsbury so soon and I'm really glad I got the answer from him. :) I'm impressed with the UNC people.
 
deafdyke said:
Well I'm glad you and I agree Hear Again!
Do you also think that people should experiment with different technologies before opting for bilaterals? I just think that bilaterals should be reserved for the absolute worst cases, and that most implantees should experiment. !
Click to expand...

It is standard for people to try different technologies before going bilateral, at least in Australia. I am in this process right now. I've already tried one hearing aid and didn't like that, not enough power. I have another that I'm trialling right now and I'm happier with the power on this on and the sound location is good! The clarity could be a fair bit better though - it sounds very echoey, distorted and hollow compared to my CI and I know I'd get 0% on a speech comp test with that ear alone. But environmentally it's quite pleasing. My audie (who feels positively about a bilateral CI for me) put me in a sound booth and I could hear a range of 20db to 50db with the hearing aid alone and she was impressed with that.

However it costs AUD$2,200 of my own personal funds to purchase when I could get a CI that would likely perform better and only have to pay for the anaesthetic out of pocket. My medical insurance would also take care of future upgrades as well whereas with a hearing aid I have already experienced not being able to repair a 3 year old hearing aid because it was obsolete. So I'm still not sure which direction I am going. My friend who has gone bilateral also went through the same process of testing out different hearing aids but wasn't happy with them, so she took the plunge and went bilateral. Now she is very happy with the bilateral CI.

So I think you can feel a bit more confident that we don't just rush into these decisions.
 
R2, I know that in countries with universal health care, they tend to be VERY conservative about implantation. Unfortunatly, the US tends to be totally market driven as to implantation. A lot, if not most implantations are legitimately needed. But having a market driven health care system can lead to a segment of the market being totally convinced that they GOTTA have the latest high tech gadget, whether it be the latest digital hearing aid or the latest CI, that can do everything but bake cookies. Like I have noticed in the past few years, that some people are really pushing CI. I once had someone IM me, and ALL they could talk about was CI and if I wanted one. Go to Hearing Exchange chat sometimes. ALL they will talk about are CIs. It's like an Asperger's Syndrome chatroom or something. They'll start asking you if you're interested in it, even if you don't have the right loss.
Sure it's a great tool........but sheesh, it's almost like they're doing product placement.
But don't you agree with me, that it's worth it to experiment?
 
deafdyke said:
Well I'm glad you and I agree Hear Again!
Do you also think that people should experiment with different technologies before opting for bilaterals? I just think that bilaterals should be reserved for the absolute worst cases, and that most implantees should experiment. There are some people who are "right off the bat" canidates.....like I believe that people with auditory nereopathy should automaticly get bilaterals, no questions asked. I just think that b/c results are so indivdual, that bilateral implantee canidates should experiment with other technology in their better ear, unless of course testing indicates absolutly NO benifit whatsoever from traditional( hearing aids) and alternative (eg body worn aid, those high frequncy transponders) I mean I know a girl who had NO benifit (not even enviormental!) from '80's (including body worns!) and 90's types of hearing aids. She recently tried hearing aids again, and she's been getting SPEECH perception from her aids!
Click to expand...

As a bilateral CI user, I have to admit I'm a little biased. :) I absolutely *love* bilateral hearing and would encourage anyone who is interested in having a second implant to go for it! At the same time, I agree that it's important for all other measures to be exhausted before doing so.

For example, I recently heard of a case where someone who wore ITEs received a CI. In that kind of situation, I *definitely* think other alternatives such as BTEs and FM systems should be explored. At the same time, many CI users who start off wearing a HA in their nonimplanted ear eventually find that it no longer provides any benefit. Sometimes this is due to a further deterioration of hearing loss. Other times it is due to the fact that the brain can no longer make sense of what it hears through the HA (due to the clarity it receives from the CI).

As for body worn HAs, I asked my CI audi about this during my CI evaluation and she said alot of audis (HA and CI) do not even bother to recommend body aids since there are only a handful of companies who manufacture them. If I remember correctly, there is only one place on the Internet (Lloyd's) where body aids can be purchased. So, that might be one reason why many CI users do not experiment with body aids.

On one hand, I think people should experiment more with other types of HAs and assistive devices. At the same time, if a person is already using the strongest HAs available on the market, chances are likely that another HA brand will not provide any improvement in what they are able to hear.

Furthermore, it's not up to me to decide what is best for another person. If they decide to have bilaterals right from the start (or several months after wearing a HA in their nonimplanted ear), they certainly have that right. The only situation where I would *strongly* disagree with a person going bilateral (or being implanted unilaterally) is when they are found to be wearing ITE aids instead of BTEs.

As I've mentioned before, I'm a bilateral CI user and *love* what I hear so it would be difficult for me to make a fair judgement about what others should or should not do in regards to having a second implant. :)
 
Last edited:
While I've never used a digital HA, I've tried a lot of listening devices and they were of little use to me for the most part. I've also used several different kind of HAs and the Phonic Ear.

If I'm not getting help from a powerful analog HA, it's highly unlikely that a digital HA would help considering that they do not bypass my damaged cochlear. I'm told I hear around 40 dbs with a HA.

My Implant isn't bilateral. I do hope to get my right ear implanted one day.
 
deafskeptic,

My experiences with HAs and FM systems were similar to yours. When I was diagnosed with severe-profound hearing loss 11 years ago, the only FM system that provided enough amplification for me was the Comtek. I tried all kinds of other FM systems (Williams Sound, Pocketalker, etc.) but none of them were powerful enough.

When I asked my CI audi about the possibility of stronger HAs (at my initial CI evaluation) I was told that the HAs I was using at the time were the strongest available on the market. I also asked about transposition aids (HAs that bring high frequencies down to the lower frequencies where they can be heard), but was told that some people have difficulty learning how to understand what they hear.

When I was evaluated for my CI, my audi tested me with my HAs connected to my Comtek FM system via direct audio input. My CI audi thought this would be a good idea considering the fact that I was already using the Comtek to help me hear more environmental sounds than I could with my HAs alone.

I've never had any success using digital HAs. They never seemed to provide enough amplification and always seemed to distort speech more than my analog aids.
 
deafdyke said:
R2, I know that in countries with universal health care, they tend to be VERY conservative about implantation. Unfortunatly, the US tends to be totally market driven as to implantation. A lot, if not most implantations are legitimately needed. But having a market driven health care system can lead to a segment of the market being totally convinced that they GOTTA have the latest high tech gadget, whether it be the latest digital hearing aid or the latest CI, that can do everything but bake cookies. But don't you agree with me, that it's worth it to experiment?
Click to expand...

Hi DD,

You're more familiar with the US than I am. From what you appear to be saying there is no or little attempt to experiment with other technologies over there before the CI stage.

Here in Australia we have both private and universal medical care. Most adults get their CIs done privately through a health insurance fund due to the fact that the waiting list is for the public system is so long. I am under the private system and so is my friend who recently got a CI. We still had to go through extensive testing and trialling of hearing aids.

As someone who did Economics at Uni and someone who is a trained accountant I question as to whether health insurance companies wherever they are located would simply nod at unnescessary CI operations. I'm sure that it happens in a small number of cases but private health insurers have their shareholders to report to and as such they want to maximise profit by spending less. A recent example has been the struggle that many people in the US have had to get their bilateral CIs approved by their insurers. Ironically we in Australia have no trouble getting our bilateral CIs approved once we have made it through the testing stage.

I'm sure that sometimes it happens - like the case that Hear Again mentioned of the person with the ITE hearing aids but a snapshot of this forum here shows that this is the exception rather than the norm. And yes I do agree that experimentation with other technologies before a CI should be done as a matter of course,

I'm not that familiar with the Hearing Exchange forum. It looks very quiet to me.
 
Hear Again said:
I've never had any success using digital HAs. They never seemed to provide enough amplification and always seemed to distort speech more than my analog aids.
Click to expand...

I don't get enough amplification from my analog HA. If I crank the volume all the way up, I can hear well but I also risk getting ringing in my ear and if I turn down the volume, it's too soft for me. I just can't win. :P
 
R2D2 said:
I'm sure that sometimes it happens - like the case that Hear Again mentioned of the person with the ITE hearing aids but a snapshot of this forum here shows that this is the exception rather than the norm. And yes I do agree that experimentation with other technologies before a CI should be done as a matter of course,QUOTE]

Yes -- CI criteria vary from CI center to CI center. Where one person with moderately-severe hearing loss in one ear and profound loss in the other may be implanted, another person with severe-profound hearing loss may not.

When insurance companies decide whether or not to pay for a CI, all kinds of supportive documentation is included such as a person's audiogram (aided and unaided), speech discrimination scores (HINT test -- sentence test in noise; sentence test in quiet; single word test) as well as observations about the way a person is/has been communicating.

The CI application my CI center required me to complete contained a multitude of questions including whether or not I could hear on the phone with both ears, left ear, right ear or neither, if I experienced difficulty communicating with others in a one-on-one situation and/or in noise, how my hearing loss impacted my ability to communicate, what kinds of daily activities were negatively affected by my hearing loss, what kinds of strategies (written communication, sign, FM system, etc.) I was using to communicate with others, how I felt about my hearing loss emotionally, why and how I thought a CI could benefit me, etc. If I remember correctly, the application was 6 pages long. So, at least as far as my CI center is concerned, people are evaluated thoroughly before they are considered a CI candidate.

Some CI centers (such as the example I gave of the person who wore ITEs before being implanted) may be more lenient than others, but generally I think all CI centers do everything possible to help anyone who walks through their doors to hear the best they can whether this means recommending the use of stronger HAs or a CI.

To my surprise, my CI audi told me that she has seen people with moderate losses (moderate across all frequencies) submit an application to be evaluated for a CI. In those cases, stronger HAs are recommended and people are advised to return for a CI evaluation in 6 months if they experience further hearing loss.
Click to expand...
 
Hear Again said:
R2D2 said:
To my surprise, my CI audi told me that she has seen people with moderate losses (moderate across all frequencies) submit an application to be evaluated for a CI. In those cases, stronger HAs are recommended and people are advised to return for a CI evaluation in 6 months if they experience further hearing loss.
Click to expand...

That doesn't really surprise me. There are some people are who don't really understand what a CI is about and think it's the latest hearing aid on the market that they have to have to paraphrase DD. As soon as you tell them that their residual hearing gets destroyed in the process though they have second thoughts.

That is what the screening process is for - to ensure that only those who need CIs get them.
Click to expand...
 
R2D2 said:
Hear Again said:
That doesn't really surprise me. There are some people are who don't really understand what a CI is about and think it's the latest hearing aid on the market that they have to have to paraphrase DD. As soon as you tell them that their residual hearing gets destroyed in the process though they have second thoughts.

That is what the screening process is for - to ensure that only those who need CIs get them.
Click to expand...

R2D2,

Good point. :) Even people with very, very little residual hearing are frightened of losing what they have.

One of these days I'm going to check out the Hearing Exchange website so I can see what DD is talking about. :)
Click to expand...
 
I just entered the chat room at Hearing Exchange and I was the only one there so I logged out.

I was a bit shocked when my audi recommended that I have my left ear implanted instead of my right ear. However her explanation makes sense.

I must say I don't like the idea of my CI being visible to all but hey I think the benefits outweighs a little vanity! :D
 
deafskeptic said:
I must say I don't like the idea of my CI being visible to all but hey I think the benefits outweighs a little vanity! :D
Click to expand...

deafskeptic,

You'd be surprised at how many people *don't* notice your CI. I have long hair and like to wear my hair in a pony tail or braid. While I get comments and questions about my CIs, it doesn't happen nearly as often as I thought it would. Most people think my CIs are the "latest and greatest" Bluetooth headset. LOL!

As for Hearing Exchange, I'm going to check out the website later this evening. Perhaps there will be more people in the chat room at that time.
 
Hear Again said:
deafskeptic,

You'd be surprised at how many people *don't* notice your CI. I have long hair and like to wear my hair in a pony tail or braid. While I get comments and questions about my CIs, it doesn't happen nearly as often as I thought it would. Most people think my CIs are the "latest and greatest" Bluetooth headset. LOL!

As for Hearing Exchange, I'm going to check out the website later this evening. Perhaps there will be more people in the chat room at that time.
Click to expand...

There are usually people in the chatroom in the evenings, like say around 7ish pm or so.
 
I question as to whether health insurance companies wherever they are located would simply nod at unnescessary CI operations. I'm sure that it happens in a small number of cases but private health insurers have their shareholders to report to and as such they want to maximise profit by spending less
Click to expand...
Oh agreed.....but I think that part of the reason why health insurance initially covered CI is b/c initially a relatively small number of people were eligable to be implanted. It was expensive yeah........but it was cost effective since in those days, only a small number of people were eligable to be implanted.
And I mean, not all insurance companies cover CI......and from what I understand it's probaly very difficult in the US, except if you have WICKED good insurance (like the kind that covers hearing aids) to get bilaterals.
Hear Again, I wish that they pushed body worns. I think in some cases, body worn hearing aids, might be just as good as CI b/c it's got a bit more power. Sort of like the difference between ITE aids and BTE aids.
deafskeptic...... I was just trying to help you debate the possibilites, that's all.
 
Back
Top