The aim of present study is to evaluate and compare speech intelligibility in hearing impaired children with cochlear implants (CI) and hearing aid (HA) users and children with normal hearing (NH). The sample consisted of 45 Persian-speaking children aged 3 to 5-years-old. They were divided into three groups, and each group had 15, children, children with CI and children using hearing aids in Hamadan. Participants was evaluated by the test of speech intelligibility level. Results of ANOVA on speech intelligibility test showed that NH children had significantly better reading performance than hearing impaired children with CI and HA. Post-hoc analysis, using Scheffe test, indicated that the mean score of speech intelligibility of normal children was higher than the HA and CI groups; but the difference was not significant between mean of speech intelligibility in children with hearing loss that use cochlear implant and those using HA. It is clear that even with remarkabkle advances in HA technology, many hearing impaired children continue to find speech production a challenging problem. Given that speech intelligibility is a key element in proper communication and social interaction, consequently, educational and rehabilitation programs are essential to improve speech intelligibility of children with hearing loss.
Child* ; Cochlear Implants* ; Hearing Aids* ; Hearing Loss ; Hearing* ; Humans ; Interpersonal Relations ; Rehabilitation ; Speech Intelligibility*

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This paper aimed at evaluating the characteristics of high-frequency (1,000 Hz) acoustic admittance (ya) for the neonates with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) as either pass or refer group. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Using a 1,000 Hz probe tone, 297neonates (152 male, 145 female aged 0–104 days old) were evaluated. Tympanometric parameters admittance value at +200 dapa, middle ear admittance, and tympanometric peak pressure were calculated for each tympanogram. RESULTS: The mean of ya was 0.9678 mmho in the TEOAE for the pass group and 0.7229 mmho in the refer group. The mean of acoustic admittance at +200 (y200) was 2.0657 in the TEOAE for the pass group and 1.7191 for the refer group. The mean of Tpp was 23/8591 in the TEOAE for the pass group and 59/7619 for the refer group. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant differences in the distribution of different types of tympanograms, the mean of ya, tympanic peak pressure, and y200 between the TEOAEs for the pass and the refer groups.
Acoustic Impedance Tests* ; Acoustics ; Ear, Middle ; Female ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn* ; Male