Speech Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation, from 1983 to Present: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Otology & Neurotology Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-28 DOI:10.1097/MAO.0000000000004468
Nia S Brown, Sanjena Venkatesh, Tazheh A Kavoosi, James O Onyeukwu, Jason A Brant, Alexandra E Quimby
{"title":"Speech Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation, from 1983 to Present: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Nia S Brown, Sanjena Venkatesh, Tazheh A Kavoosi, James O Onyeukwu, Jason A Brant, Alexandra E Quimby","doi":"10.1097/MAO.0000000000004468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to assess whether the totality of advancements seen in cochlear implant (CI) design and implementation have translated to significant improvements in speech perception scores.</p><p><strong>Databases reviewed: </strong>EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review of all English-language studies in peer-reviewed journals from 1946 to August 2022 was performed based on the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies were of adult patients who underwent cochlear implantation with Cochlear®, Med-EL, or Advanced Bionics devices with 12 months postoperative sentence recognition testing results. Meta-regression was performed to assess the relationship between speech recognition score and year of implantation. Preimplantation score and unilateral versus bilateral implantation were adjusted for. Subgroup analysis was performed by restricting to studies of <5 years duration and in which outcomes were measured ≤12 months postoperatively to reduce the likelihood of patients with remotely implanted devices having undergone upgrades to more contemporary coding software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 37 studies met criteria for inclusion, representing CIs implanted between 1983 and 2019. No significant association was identified between median study year and scores on 12-month postoperative sentence recognition testing on any of AzBio in quiet, CNC words, or HINT sentences in quiet. Subgroup analysis showed no difference in outcomes across 15 studies including patients implanted from 2007 to 2019.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the absence of improved CI coding strategies since 2007, speech recognition outcomes in quiet have also not improved significantly since this time.</p>","PeriodicalId":19732,"journal":{"name":"Otology & Neurotology","volume":"46 4","pages":"393-404"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Otology & Neurotology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000004468","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: We sought to assess whether the totality of advancements seen in cochlear implant (CI) design and implementation have translated to significant improvements in speech perception scores.

Databases reviewed: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

Methods: A systematic review of all English-language studies in peer-reviewed journals from 1946 to August 2022 was performed based on the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies were of adult patients who underwent cochlear implantation with Cochlear®, Med-EL, or Advanced Bionics devices with 12 months postoperative sentence recognition testing results. Meta-regression was performed to assess the relationship between speech recognition score and year of implantation. Preimplantation score and unilateral versus bilateral implantation were adjusted for. Subgroup analysis was performed by restricting to studies of <5 years duration and in which outcomes were measured ≤12 months postoperatively to reduce the likelihood of patients with remotely implanted devices having undergone upgrades to more contemporary coding software.

Results: A total of 37 studies met criteria for inclusion, representing CIs implanted between 1983 and 2019. No significant association was identified between median study year and scores on 12-month postoperative sentence recognition testing on any of AzBio in quiet, CNC words, or HINT sentences in quiet. Subgroup analysis showed no difference in outcomes across 15 studies including patients implanted from 2007 to 2019.

Conclusion: In the absence of improved CI coding strategies since 2007, speech recognition outcomes in quiet have also not improved significantly since this time.

1983年至今人工耳蜗植入术的语言效果:系统回顾。
目的:我们试图评估人工耳蜗(CI)设计和实施的总体进展是否转化为语音感知评分的显着改善。数据库综述:EMBASE、PubMed/MEDLINE和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库。方法:根据Cochrane手册和系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,对1946年至2022年8月同行评议期刊上的所有英语研究进行系统评价。符合条件的研究是采用cochlear®、Med-EL或Advanced Bionics设备进行人工耳蜗植入的成年患者,术后12个月的句子识别测试结果。meta回归评估语音识别评分与植入年份的关系。对种植前评分和单侧与双侧种植进行调整。通过限制研究结果进行亚组分析:共有37项研究符合纳入标准,代表1983年至2019年植入的CIs。中位研究年份与术后12个月AzBio安静组、CNC单词组或HINT句子组的句子识别测试得分之间没有显著关联。亚组分析显示,包括2007年至2019年植入的患者在内的15项研究的结果没有差异。结论:自2007年以来,由于缺乏改进的CI编码策略,安静状态下的语音识别结果也没有显著改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Otology & Neurotology
Otology & Neurotology 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
509
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​Otology & Neurotology publishes original articles relating to both clinical and basic science aspects of otology, neurotology, and cranial base surgery. As the foremost journal in its field, it has become the favored place for publishing the best of new science relating to the human ear and its diseases. The broadly international character of its contributing authors, editorial board, and readership provides the Journal its decidedly global perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信