Evidence-Based Inclusion Criteria for Cochlear Implantation in Patients With Postlingual Deafness

Snel-Bongers, Jorien; Netten, Anouk P.; Boermans, Peter-Paul B. M.; Rotteveel, Liselotte J. C.; Briaire, Jeroen J.; Frijns, Johan H. M.

doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000000568

Cited by 27 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another 2.5% evaluated both populations together, and 3.3% articles did not report onset of hearing loss for their study participants. Nine articles (25%; ID 6,33,35,60,82,83,87,89,96) reported on outcomes of adults with SSD.…”

Section: Postoperative Self-reported Outcomes (Effectiveness)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More sophisticated testing has, however, demonstrated enhancement of speech perception in noisy environments for some of these recipients [32,34]. The probability of functional improvement after cochlear implantation also decreases with more hearing in the ear to be implanted, particularly as the pre-implant word perception score for this ear approaches the mean post-operative performance with a cochlear implant [35]. Despite improvement in hearing preservation techniques during implantation, the surgery is likely to reduce or eliminate any residual hearing in the ear to be implanted [36][37][38].…”

Section: Speech Perception Improvement (Efficacy)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cochlear implantation outcomes in adults: A scoping review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochlear implantation has become known as "the treatment of choice" for adults with severe to profound hearing loss. Wide variability exists, however, in the way hearing loss severity is measured and in the candidacy criteria used to recommend cochlear implantation. ObjectivesThis study aimed to provide a descriptive analysis of recent evidence available in the literature in relation to the efficacy of unilateral cochlear implantation in adults, the general findings of these studies, and the populations to which these findings apply. It also aimed to appraise the individual success rate and the magnitude of benefit following implantation. DesignA scoping review was conducted to identify English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2000 and 2018 assessing the outcomes of cochlear implantation in adults who received their first cochlear implant from 2000 onwards. To be included, studies had to report speech perception or self-reported measures of listening or quality of life at least three months after implantation. Systematic searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar. A two-stage screening approach was used, with seven reviewers independently screening titles and abstracts against inclusion criteria and three from this group further reviewing full-texts. A data charting form was developed and trialled, with 10% of the study data extracted in duplicate to compare results and further refine the form. Data relevant for efficacy analyses were extracted from studies with sample sizes of at least 10 participants. ResultsA total of 4182 abstracts were screened against inclusion criteria, and of these, 603 fulltexts were further screened. After exclusion of non-eligible articles, 201 articles were included in the first part of this scoping review. The majority of these articles were case series or comparative studies without a concurrent group, and had small sample sizes. Data PLOS ONECompeting interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. synthesis conducted with the 102 articles with more than 10 participants highlighted that the average word perception ability improved from 8.2% to 53.9% after implantation. Selfreported benefit improved by 21.5 percentage points. At the individual level, 82.0% of adults with postlingual hearing loss and 53.4% of adults with prelingual hearing loss improved their speech perception ability by 15 percentage points or more. A small proportion had poorer ability after implantation or had stopped using the cochlear implant. ConclusionsDespite broad inconsistencies in measurement, research design, and reporting across articles, it is evident that cochlear implantation is beneficial to the majority of adults of any age who have limited aided speech perception abilities. While many adults with severe-to-profound hearing loss may also have poor speech perception abilities with hearing aids, the validity of using hearing loss severity as a criterion for cochlear implantation has not been demonstrated. Clinical and...

show abstract

Section: Postoperative Self-reported Outcomes (Effectiveness)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Speech Perception Improvement (Efficacy)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochlear implantation outcomes in adults: A scoping review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Percent-correct phoneme score was used as a measure of speech perception. We used CVC scores obtained at the 1-year follow-up, because after that period the CVC scores are stabilised (Snel-Bongers et al 2018). If these scores were not available, the scores at 2-year follow-up (S0423 and S0425) or at 6-months follow-up (S0426) were included.…”

Section: Speech Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Channel discrimination along all contacts of the cochlear implant electrode array and its relation to speech perception

Biesheuvel

Briaire

Jong

et al. 2019

International Journal of Audiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To test the channel discrimination of cochlear implant (CI) users along all contacts of the electrode array and assess whether this is related to speech perception. Design: CI recipients were tested with a custom-made channel discrimination test. They were asked to distinguish a target stimulus from two reference stimuli in a three-alternative forced choice (3AFC) task. The target stimulus was evoked using current steering, with current steering coefficients (a) of 1, 0.5 and 0.25. The test provided a discrimination score (Da) for each electrode contact along the array. Study sample: Thirty adults implanted with a CI from Advanced Bionics. Results: Large variations in Da scores were observed, both across the electrode array and between subjects. Statistical analysis revealed a significant channel-to-channel variability in Da score (p < 0.01). Further, there was a significant relationship between subjects' Da scores and their speech perception in quiet (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The large variations in Da score emphasise the importance of testing pitch discrimination across the complete electrode array. The relationship between Da score and speech perception indicates that pitch discrimination might be a contributing factor to the performance of individual implant users.

show abstract

“…Vickers et al collected information on indication criteria in 17 countries; in general, CI indication criteria were based on either speech recognition with conventional hearing aids (more functional) or based on the audiometric hearing loss or both. In The Netherlands [ 16 ] for example, patients are considered for cochlear implantation if the phoneme score, presented at normal conversation level and obtained with a well-fitted conventional hearing aid, is less than 50%, which equals a word score of 20% [ 16 ]. In the Netherlands, this 50% criterion is set in consensus by the Dutch CI centers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the Netherlands, this 50% criterion is set in consensus by the Dutch CI centers. However, since Dutch CI centers are allowed to deviate from this criterion on individual basis [ 16 ], this criterion has gradually shifted towards 70% phoneme score (44% word score) in quiet.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding unilateral cochlear implantation criteria for adults with bilateral acquired severe sensorineural hearing loss

Huinck

Mylanus

Snik

2019

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To report on a retrospective cohort study on the effects of expanding inclusion criteria for application of cochlear implants (CIs) on the performance 1-year post-implantation. Methods Based on pre-implantation audiometric thresholds and aided speech recognition scores, the data of 164 CI recipients were divided into a group of patients that fulfilled conservative criteria (mean hearing loss at 0.5, 1 and 2 kHz > 85 dB HL and phoneme scores with hearing aids < 30%), and the remaining group of patients that felt outside this conservative criterion. Speech recognition scores (in quiet) and quality of life (using the NCIQ) of both groups, measured at 1-year post-implantation, were compared. Results The group that felt outside the conservative criterion showed a higher phoneme score at 1-year post-implantation compared to the conservative group, suggesting that relaxed criteria have a positive influence on the speech recognition results with CI. With respect to quality of life, both groups significantly improved 1-year post-implantation. The conservative group showed a higher benefit on the advanced perception domain of the NCIQ. Based on their worse pre-implantation hearing, this was expected. Conclusions The data suggest that relaxation of CI indication positively affects the speech recognition performance of patients with severe hearing loss. Both groups of patients showed a positive effect of CI on the quality of life. This benefit relates to communication skills and the subjective day-to-day functioning in society.

show abstract

Evidence-Based Inclusion Criteria for Cochlear Implantation in Patients With Postlingual Deafness

Cited by 27 publications

References 13 publications

Cochlear implantation outcomes in adults: A scoping review

Cochlear implantation outcomes in adults: A scoping review

Channel discrimination along all contacts of the cochlear implant electrode array and its relation to speech perception

Expanding unilateral cochlear implantation criteria for adults with bilateral acquired severe sensorineural hearing loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About