European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
Impact of cochlear implant indications on outcome, assessed and reported using the international classification of functioning, disability and health model.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Andries Ellen, Lorens Artur, Skarżyński Piotr Henryk, Skarżyński Henryk, Calvino Miryam, Gavilán Javier, Lassaletta Luis, Tavora-Vieira Dayse, Acharya Aanand, Kurz Anja, Hagen Rudolf, Anderson Ilona, Koinig Karin, Abdelsamad Yassin, Van de Heyning Paul, Van Rompaey Vincent, Mertens Griet
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of various Cochlear Implant (CI) indications on outcomes assessed using the International Classification of Functioning, disability and health (ICF)-based CI outcome assessment (CI-ICF) protocol.
METHODS: Data from a multicenter longitudinal cohort study was analyzed. A consecutive sample of adult CI users (N = 72), including unilateral (n = 22), bilateral (n = 2), electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) (n = 6), single-sided deafness (SSD) (n = 6), and bimodal (n = 36) CI users, were enrolled based on clinical indications for cochlear implantation. Participants were assessed preoperatively and six months postoperatively using the CI-ICF protocol, which comprises patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pure tone and speech audiometry and localization tests.
RESULTS: All CI indication groups showed benefits across most PROMs, pure tone and speech audiometry and localization. Differences were mainly observed in participants with SSD, who showed better baseline auditory abilities and less postoperative improvement compared to other groups for sound detection (PTA4) [e.g. PTA4 difference over time: SSD versus unilateral CI (p = 0.003)] and listening (HISQUI19) [e.g. HISQUI19 difference over time: SSD versus bimodal (p = 0.039)]. Participants with bimodal stimulation or SSD generally exhibited superior speech discrimination in noise abilities pre- and postoperatively, and demonstrated an equivalent amount of improvement for this category compared to EAS and unilateral CI users.
CONCLUSION: Various CI indication groups experienced improvements following cochlear implantation, highlighting its broad efficacy. Personalized CI strategies are essential to maximize individual outcomes. These findings support the comprehensive and readily interpretable assessment framework provided by the CI-ICF protocol in evaluating CI outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04611555), retrospectively registered on 2-Nov-2020.
METHODS: Data from a multicenter longitudinal cohort study was analyzed. A consecutive sample of adult CI users (N = 72), including unilateral (n = 22), bilateral (n = 2), electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) (n = 6), single-sided deafness (SSD) (n = 6), and bimodal (n = 36) CI users, were enrolled based on clinical indications for cochlear implantation. Participants were assessed preoperatively and six months postoperatively using the CI-ICF protocol, which comprises patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pure tone and speech audiometry and localization tests.
RESULTS: All CI indication groups showed benefits across most PROMs, pure tone and speech audiometry and localization. Differences were mainly observed in participants with SSD, who showed better baseline auditory abilities and less postoperative improvement compared to other groups for sound detection (PTA4) [e.g. PTA4 difference over time: SSD versus unilateral CI (p = 0.003)] and listening (HISQUI19) [e.g. HISQUI19 difference over time: SSD versus bimodal (p = 0.039)]. Participants with bimodal stimulation or SSD generally exhibited superior speech discrimination in noise abilities pre- and postoperatively, and demonstrated an equivalent amount of improvement for this category compared to EAS and unilateral CI users.
CONCLUSION: Various CI indication groups experienced improvements following cochlear implantation, highlighting its broad efficacy. Personalized CI strategies are essential to maximize individual outcomes. These findings support the comprehensive and readily interpretable assessment framework provided by the CI-ICF protocol in evaluating CI outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04611555), retrospectively registered on 2-Nov-2020.