title: [Modification of thresholds T in cochlear implant patients as an alternative programming time in relation to the time].
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Programming the cochlear implant (CI) has always been a challenge for all medical specialists in audiology, especially in pediatric patients without language secondary profound hearing loss. For this reason are searched alternatives to achieve normal hearing with the implant during programming in the shortest time possible.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To analyze whether through modification threshold T we get faster audiological threshold, describe the differences in time found in patients with sensorineural hearing loss IC users with thresholds T at 10% modified, and T thresholds modified according to clinical responses after obtaining audiological threshold within normal parameters and report the speech coding strategies commonly used at the start of the program and to reach above the hearing threshold to language area.
  
  
  METHODS
  We performed an observational, cross-sectional, descriptive, comparative study in which we evaluated a total of 31 patients with sensorineural hearing loss, under six years, and both sexes, of cochlear implant users of Advanced Bionics, which were divided in two groups: Group I: 15 patients with modification of thresholds T to 10%, following the manufacturer's recommendations (unmodified) and Group II: 16 patients with T threshold modification according to clinical response cochlear (modified). Were reported strategies most used speech coding in both groups at the start of the program and to reach the threshold audiological within normal parameters.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In patients in group I (not modified) were 256 days on average to reach threshold audiological and group II (modified) was 335.6 days. Without statistic significant p = 0.197, with an average of 295.8 days for both groups and the speech coding strategy more used was the Hi-Res P with Fidelity 120, modifying both groups only one patient from power up obtaining threshold.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  It was established that thresholds T patient's subjective threshold as compared to T of 10% automatically obtained by SoundWave is not necessary since there are no statistically significant differences in relation to time to take patients implanted normal hearing threshold. The speech coding strategies more widely used and accepted by the patient was the Hi-Res P with Fidelity 120.
authors.forename: Ayla Cecilia
authors.initials: AC
authors.lastname: Fernández-Córdoba
authors.forename: Ileana Del Socorro
authors.initials: Idel S
authors.lastname: Gutiérrez-Farfán
authors.forename: Laura Elizabeth
authors.initials: LE
authors.lastname: Chamlati-Aguirre
authors.forename: Alfonso
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Alfaro-Rodríguez
authors.affiliation: Servicio de Neurorrehabilitación. Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación.
authors.forename: Alfredo
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Durand-Rivera
mesh_terms: D001309:Auditory Threshold / Q000502:physiology*; D002675:Child, Preschool; D019929:Cochlear Implantation; D003054:Cochlear Implants; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005260:Female; D006319:Hearing Loss, Sensorineural / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D013069:Speech Reception Threshold Test; D013997:Time Factors