Impact of cochlear implant indications on outcome, assessed and reported using the international classification of functioning, disability and health model.

IF 2.2
Ellen Andries, Artur Lorens, Piotr Henryk Skarżyński, Henryk Skarżyński, Miryam Calvino, Javier Gavilán, Luis Lassaletta, Dayse Tavora-Vieira, Aanand Acharya, Anja Kurz, Rudolf Hagen, Ilona Anderson, Karin Koinig, Yassin Abdelsamad, Paul Van de Heyning, Vincent Van Rompaey, Griet Mertens
{"title":"Impact of cochlear implant indications on outcome, assessed and reported using the international classification of functioning, disability and health model.","authors":"Ellen Andries, Artur Lorens, Piotr Henryk Skarżyński, Henryk Skarżyński, Miryam Calvino, Javier Gavilán, Luis Lassaletta, Dayse Tavora-Vieira, Aanand Acharya, Anja Kurz, Rudolf Hagen, Ilona Anderson, Karin Koinig, Yassin Abdelsamad, Paul Van de Heyning, Vincent Van Rompaey, Griet Mertens","doi":"10.1007/s00405-025-09454-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04611555), retrospectively registered on 2-Nov-2020.</p>","PeriodicalId":520614,"journal":{"name":"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","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"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","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-025-09454-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

使用国际功能、残疾和健康分类模型评估和报告人工耳蜗指征对结果的影响。
目的:确定各种人工耳蜗(CI)适应症对使用基于国际功能、残疾和健康分类(ICF)的CI结果评估(CI-ICF)方案评估的结果的影响。方法:对一项多中心纵向队列研究的数据进行分析。根据人工耳蜗植入的临床指征,连续招募成人CI使用者(N = 72),包括单侧(N = 22)、双侧(N = 2)、电声刺激(EAS) (N = 6)、单侧耳聋(SSD) (N = 6)和双峰(N = 36) CI使用者。术前和术后6个月采用CI-ICF方案对参与者进行评估,其中包括患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)、纯音和语音听力学以及定位测试。结果:所有CI指征组在大多数PROMs,纯音和语音听力测量和定位方面都表现出益处。差异主要在SSD患者中观察到,与其他组相比,SSD患者在声音检测(PTA4)[例如PTA4随时间的差异:SSD与单侧CI (p = 0.003)]和听力(HISQUI19)[例如HISQUI19随时间的差异:SSD与双峰CI (p = 0.039)]方面表现出更好的基线听觉能力和较少的术后改善。接受双峰刺激或SSD的参与者在术前和术后表现出更好的语音辨别能力,并且与EAS和单侧CI用户相比,在这一类别中表现出等量的改善。结论:人工耳蜗植入术后各CI指征组均有改善,显示其广泛的疗效。个性化CI策略对于最大化个人结果至关重要。这些发现支持CI- icf协议在评估CI结果时提供的全面且易于解释的评估框架。试验注册:Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04611555),回顾性注册于2020年11月2日。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信