人工耳蜗植入听力学家对选择性电极停用态度和做法的调查。

IF 1.4 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL Pub Date : 2023-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-02 DOI:10.1080/14670100.2023.2166571
Kara L Sander, Sarah E Warren, Lisa Lucks Mendel
{"title":"人工耳蜗植入听力学家对选择性电极停用态度和做法的调查。","authors":"Kara L Sander, Sarah E Warren, Lisa Lucks Mendel","doi":"10.1080/14670100.2023.2166571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of this study was to explore clinician attitudes regarding selective electrode deactivation and to investigate the primary methodology used to identify poorly encoded electrodes, deactivate identified electrodes, and measure outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey consisting of 32 questions was administered to certified clinical and research cochlear implant (CI) audiologists. Questions asked participants about their demographic information, device programming patterns, and attitudes regarding selective electrode deactivation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-four audiologists completed the survey. When asked whether they believed selectively deactivating poorly encoded electrodes could improve speech perception outcomes, 43% of respondents selected 'Probably Yes,' 39% selected 'Definitely Yes,' and 18% selected 'Might or Might Not.' Of those who reported deactivating electrodes as part of CI programming, various methodology was reported to identify and deactivate poorly encoding electrodes and evaluate effectiveness of deactivation. General reasons against deactivation were also reported.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>CI audiologists generally believed selective electrode deactivation could be used to improve speech perception outcomes for patients; however, few reported implementing selective electrode deactivation in practice. Among those who do perform selective electrode deactivation, the reported methodology was highly variable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings support the need for clinical practice guidelines to assist audiologists in performing selective electrode deactivation.</p>","PeriodicalId":53553,"journal":{"name":"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL","volume":"24 3","pages":"167-175"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survey of selective electrode deactivation attitudes and practices by cochlear implant audiologists.\",\"authors\":\"Kara L Sander, Sarah E Warren, Lisa Lucks Mendel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14670100.2023.2166571\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of this study was to explore clinician attitudes regarding selective electrode deactivation and to investigate the primary methodology used to identify poorly encoded electrodes, deactivate identified electrodes, and measure outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey consisting of 32 questions was administered to certified clinical and research cochlear implant (CI) audiologists. Questions asked participants about their demographic information, device programming patterns, and attitudes regarding selective electrode deactivation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-four audiologists completed the survey. When asked whether they believed selectively deactivating poorly encoded electrodes could improve speech perception outcomes, 43% of respondents selected 'Probably Yes,' 39% selected 'Definitely Yes,' and 18% selected 'Might or Might Not.' Of those who reported deactivating electrodes as part of CI programming, various methodology was reported to identify and deactivate poorly encoding electrodes and evaluate effectiveness of deactivation. General reasons against deactivation were also reported.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>CI audiologists generally believed selective electrode deactivation could be used to improve speech perception outcomes for patients; however, few reported implementing selective electrode deactivation in practice. Among those who do perform selective electrode deactivation, the reported methodology was highly variable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings support the need for clinical practice guidelines to assist audiologists in performing selective electrode deactivation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53553,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL\",\"volume\":\"24 3\",\"pages\":\"167-175\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2023.2166571\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/2/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2023.2166571","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究旨在探讨临床医生对选择性电极停用的态度,并调查用于识别编码不良电极、停用已识别电极和测量结果的主要方法:对经认证的临床和研究型人工耳蜗 (CI) 听力学家进行了一项包含 32 个问题的在线调查。问题涉及参与者的人口统计学信息、设备编程模式以及对选择性电极停用的态度:54名听力学家完成了调查。当被问及他们是否认为选择性停用编码不良的电极可以改善言语感知效果时,43% 的受访者选择了 "可能是",39% 的受访者选择了 "肯定是",18% 的受访者选择了 "可能或可能不是"。在将停用电极作为 CI 编程的一部分的受访者中,报告了各种方法来识别和停用编码不良的电极并评估停用的效果。此外,还报告了反对停用电极的一般原因:讨论:CI 听力学家普遍认为,选择性停用电极可用于改善患者的言语感知效果;然而,很少有人报告在实践中实施了选择性停用电极。在那些实施选择性电极停用的听力学家中,所报告的方法差异很大:这些研究结果表明,有必要制定临床实践指南,以帮助听力学家实施选择性电极停用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survey of selective electrode deactivation attitudes and practices by cochlear implant audiologists.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to explore clinician attitudes regarding selective electrode deactivation and to investigate the primary methodology used to identify poorly encoded electrodes, deactivate identified electrodes, and measure outcomes.

Methods: An online survey consisting of 32 questions was administered to certified clinical and research cochlear implant (CI) audiologists. Questions asked participants about their demographic information, device programming patterns, and attitudes regarding selective electrode deactivation.

Results: Fifty-four audiologists completed the survey. When asked whether they believed selectively deactivating poorly encoded electrodes could improve speech perception outcomes, 43% of respondents selected 'Probably Yes,' 39% selected 'Definitely Yes,' and 18% selected 'Might or Might Not.' Of those who reported deactivating electrodes as part of CI programming, various methodology was reported to identify and deactivate poorly encoding electrodes and evaluate effectiveness of deactivation. General reasons against deactivation were also reported.

Discussion: CI audiologists generally believed selective electrode deactivation could be used to improve speech perception outcomes for patients; however, few reported implementing selective electrode deactivation in practice. Among those who do perform selective electrode deactivation, the reported methodology was highly variable.

Conclusion: These findings support the need for clinical practice guidelines to assist audiologists in performing selective electrode deactivation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Cochlear Implants International was founded as an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal in response to the growing number of publications in the field of cochlear implants. It was designed to meet a need to include scientific contributions from all the disciplines that are represented in cochlear implant teams: audiology, medicine and surgery, speech therapy and speech pathology, psychology, hearing therapy, radiology, pathology, engineering and acoustics, teaching, and communication. The aim was to found a truly interdisciplinary journal, representing the full breadth of the field of cochlear implantation.
×
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