Factors affecting consonant production accuracy in children with cochlear implants: Expressive vocabulary and maternal education

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundDespite the ability of cochlear implants (CIs) to provide children with access to speech, there is considerable variability in spoken language outcomes. Research aimed at identifying factors influencing speech production accuracy is needed.AimsTo characterize the consonant production accuracy of children with cochlear implants (CWCI) and an age‐matched group of children with typical hearing (CWTH) and to explore several factors that potentially affect the ability of both groups to accurately produce consonants.Methods & ProceduresWe administered the Bankson‐Bernthal Test of Phonology (BBTOP) to a group of 25 CWCI (mean age = 4;9, SD = 1;6, range = 3;2–8;5) implanted prior to 30 months of age with a mean duration of implant usage of 3;6 and an age‐matched group of 25 CWTH (mean age = 5;0, SD = 1;6, range = 3;1–8;6). The recorded results were transcribed, and the accuracy of the target consonants was determined. Expressive vocabulary size estimates were obtained from a language sample using the number of different words (NDW). A parent questionnaire provided information about maternal education, duration of CIs experience and other demographic characteristics of each child.Outcomes & ResultsThe CWCI group demonstrated some similarities to, and some differences from, their hearing peers. The CWCI demonstrated poorer consonant production accuracy overall and in various phonetic categories and word positions. However, both groups produced initial consonants more accurately than final consonants. Whilst CWCI had poorer production accuracy than CWTH for all phonetic categories (stops, nasals, fricatives, affricates, liquids and glides and consonant clusters), both groups exhibited similar error patterns across categories. For CWCI, the factors most related to consonant production accuracy when considered individually were expressive vocabulary size, followed by duration of CI experience, chronological age, maternal education and gender. The combination of maternal education and vocabulary size resulted in the best model of consonant production accuracy for this group. For the CWTH, chronological age followed by vocabulary size were most related to consonant production accuracy. No combination of factors yielded an improved model for the CWTH.Conclusions & ImplicationsWhilst group differences in production accuracy between the CWCI and CWTH were found, the pattern of errors was similar for the two groups of children, suggesting that the children are at earlier stages of overall consonant production development. Although duration of CI experience was a significant covariate in a single‐variable model of consonant production accuracy for CWCI, the best multivariate model of consonant production accuracy for these children was based on the combination of expressive vocabulary size and maternal education.WHAT THIS PAPER ADDSWhat is already known on the subject Research has shown that a range of factors is associated with consonant production accuracy by CWCIs, including factors such as the age at implant, duration of implant use, gender, other language skills and maternal education. Despite numerous studies that have examined speech sound production in these children, most have explored a limited number of factors that might explain the variability in scores obtained. Research that examines the potential role of a range of child‐related and environmental factors in the same children is needed to determine the predictive role of these factors in speech production outcomes. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge Whilst the consonant production accuracy was lower for the CWCIs than for their typically hearing peers, there were some similarities suggesting that these children are experiencing similar, but delayed, acquisition of consonant production skills to that of their hearing peers. Whilst several factors are predictive of consonant production accuracy in children with implants, vocabulary diversity and maternal education, an indirect measure of socio‐economic status, were the best combined predictors of consonant production accuracy.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Understanding the factors that shape individual differences in CWCI speech production is important for effective clinical decision‐making and intervention planning. The present findings point to two potentially important factors related to speech sound production beyond the duration of robust hearing in CWCI, namely, a lexical diversity and maternal education. This suggests that intervention is likely most efficient that addresses both vocabulary development and speech sound development together. The current findings further suggest the importance of parental involvement and commitment to spoken language development and the importance of receiving early and consistent intervention aimed both at skill development and parental efficacy.