Evaluation Process for CIs - Your experience?

Something else that comes to mind is that a CI isn’t a one time thing. Yes, you get the surgery. But you have to go through aural rehabilitation, largely a self-driven process. You’ll need mappings regularly for years. You’ll need batteries, you’ll need new processors eventually, that sort of thing.

Something to add to this.
The way I understand the CI Evaluation is it’s to weed out those that won’t get the hopeful benefit of speech recognition from the CI.
I suspect there was a time when people got a CI and was not happy because the CI didn’t really benefit their speech recognition.
Plus what phobos512 said about facial nerve, dizziness and other medical issues.

@Raudrive I had tinnitus prior to CI. I only developed this when the SSHL occurred. It was extremely mild that I could just hear it. Just a single click, these clicks could run together or stay as one click. I still have tinnitus post CI, still just very mild clicks. But when I’m wearing my processor I don’t hear it at all.

Thanks for that information.
The pluses and minuses of CI are being thought out. For me at this time it is a no brainer to do the CI. I can only imagine understanding speech without 110% effort to understand. To relax and have a conversation is very exciting indeed.

@Blacky said:

So that’d mean that, ideally, if you experience sudden loss, getting CI ASAP would basically offer almost continuous input.

Yes, this is absolutely correct.

In my answer above I was just comparing the success stories going for a CI.
I did not want to say: “Wear a HA for decades before going for a CI” - that is wrong. If you are a candidate for a CI then go for it! And please do it as soon as possible.

But one should always keep in mind that it sounds different than normal hearing. A CI will by far not give your brain the same amount of information as with normal hearing. Those people with a sudden loss will more likely be disappointed by their performance than those people having a HA for decades before. The latter are used to squeeze as much information as possible out of so poor audio input. The first are used to let pass information to their brain as the sound comes through without further analysis. With a CI you (still) have to pay very much attention to listen what you hear.

I know a couple of CI guys. Some had normal hearings and then had a sudden loss. In the beginnings they were disappointed. After a couple of years their CI ear still does not perform as well as their other normal hearing ear (of course). But they are happy anyway because they can hear directions from where the sounds come from and their understandings in noisy environment is better than without their CI (but they still have much more trouble than those without any hearing loss). Most of them are still not able to use a landline telephone (i.e. without bluetooth) on their CI side. In contrast I am able to do this although I’ve always used my other ear to listen on the telephone.

Thank you for this informative post.

Your description of how much information is brought in by the CI compared to normal hearing is interesting. That is something I did not know. That also goes along with the rationale of the CI evaluation.

@Dani said:

With a CI you (still) have to pay very much attention to listen what you hear.

This is another thing I did not know. Could this be due to you just getting a CI or will this be forever? I have hoped to hear better without trying so hard.

Not being able to hear a landline phone without Bluetooth is interesting news too. That shouldn’t bother most of us, can not use one now.

Me personally, I would always expect to have to exert more effort listening than a person with normal hearing, whether that’s with hearing aids or with a CI/hearing aid or two CIs. Especially in the beginning. Certainly if someone has normal hearing in one ear and a hearing aid or CI in the other ear they’re going to feel they perform better with the normal hearing ear. Those of us who need help in both ears I think we’ll find over time we’ll perform better with the CI in general; that is the whole point, after all.

Just got home from the second opinion CI evaluation. This AUD found that both ears are candidates. He did mention that he could not imagine how the first AUD got 69% sentence understanding out of my hearing.
So, my journey begins.

Good for you keep me in the loop. I want to be here for you anyway I can

Glad you had a better experience with this second evaluation. Would be curious to know how the testing varied. Big decisions to make.

That’s a great explanation of needing the second implant. We do know what their hearing loss is but it’s obvious not very good. Logic is the answer.

I plan to have both implants at once if Medicare will go along with it.

@Raudrive Congrats! This is great news! I know there are some pre-op things that need to be done before surgery, but have you been given a tentative surgery date yet?

I’m so happy you found an audi that was able to see that you really do need this surgery. Keep us in the loop and best of luck to you!

So glad to hear that someone took you seriously!
When you have time, I think we all would like to hear what was the difference in evaluation.

@Raudrive said:

The AUD I dealt with has two implants using two Kanso processors. He was a pleasure to talk to. He would be the programmer I would use.

This sounds like a jackpot! Since he really knows what it’s like to get and wear CI!

I think we all here, after realising our hearing loss became much more empathetic towards others with hearing loss, and about differences between us, and how each of us has own journey and obstacles to overcome. I’m not sure if the most empathetic normal hearing person could ever imagine extent of frustrations and what really becomes an obstacle for us.

I was shocked to get number on paper that my good ear neither alone nor with aided right can get more than 80% if there’s just white noise. I knew I have hard time, but wasn’t thinking about numbers, so it was quite a surprise. And I’m the one using that ears and brain.

To others, 50-80% might sound great. But only people who have those ‘great’ numbers can really understand how bad the situation really is and how we constantly need to think about how to improve comprehension. People don’t think about listening while they listen.

At one place I saw - if it’s not great for a math test, it’s not great as comprehension result. So they said, only 90% and above is something that we can consider really good.

I hope your journey from now on will be a good one

@Raudrive fantastic news for you Congratulations. I’m curious as to what testing the 2nd Aud did differently from the first evaluation? Was the testing procedure different?
Your new journey will be exciting for you.

I could understand speech a lot sooner than environmental sounds. These sounds took around 6 months before I could start to hear them. It’s generally the other way around. I can remember standing in the kitchen, trying to figure out where the heck that noise was coming from, so I could work out what that sound was. Until it all clicks into place it can be very frustrating but oh so rewarding. Good Luck on your journey.