确定成人人工耳蜗的候选资格:局限性、扩展和改进的机会。

Q2 Health Professions
Seminars in Hearing Pub Date : 2021-12-09 eCollection Date: 2021-11-01 DOI:10.1055/s-0041-1739283
Teresa A Zwolan, Gregory Basura
{"title":"确定成人人工耳蜗的候选资格:局限性、扩展和改进的机会。","authors":"Teresa A Zwolan,&nbsp;Gregory Basura","doi":"10.1055/s-0041-1739283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The safety, efficacy, and success of cochlear implants (CIs) are well established and have led to changes in criteria used by clinicians to determine who should receive a CI. Such changes in clinical decision-making have out-paced the slower-occurring changes that have taken place with regulatory bodies' and insurers' indications. We review the historical development of indications for CIs, including those of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. We report on expansion to include patients with greater residual hearing, such as those who receive Hybrid and EAS devices, and report on recent FDA approvals that place less emphasis on the patient's best-aided condition and greater emphasis on the ear to be treated. This includes expansion of CIs to patients with single-side deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. We review changes in the test materials used to determine candidacy, including transition from sentences in quiet to sentences in noise to the recent use of monosyllabic words and cognitive screening measures. Importantly, we discuss the recent trend to recommend CIs despite a patient not meeting FDA or insurers' indications (a practice known as \"off-label\"), which serves as attestation that current indications need to be updated.</p>","PeriodicalId":53691,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Hearing","volume":"42 4","pages":"331-341"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8660165/pdf/","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Adults: Limitations, Expansions, and Opportunities for Improvement.\",\"authors\":\"Teresa A Zwolan,&nbsp;Gregory Basura\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0041-1739283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The safety, efficacy, and success of cochlear implants (CIs) are well established and have led to changes in criteria used by clinicians to determine who should receive a CI. Such changes in clinical decision-making have out-paced the slower-occurring changes that have taken place with regulatory bodies' and insurers' indications. We review the historical development of indications for CIs, including those of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. We report on expansion to include patients with greater residual hearing, such as those who receive Hybrid and EAS devices, and report on recent FDA approvals that place less emphasis on the patient's best-aided condition and greater emphasis on the ear to be treated. This includes expansion of CIs to patients with single-side deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. We review changes in the test materials used to determine candidacy, including transition from sentences in quiet to sentences in noise to the recent use of monosyllabic words and cognitive screening measures. Importantly, we discuss the recent trend to recommend CIs despite a patient not meeting FDA or insurers' indications (a practice known as \\\"off-label\\\"), which serves as attestation that current indications need to be updated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53691,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in Hearing\",\"volume\":\"42 4\",\"pages\":\"331-341\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8660165/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in Hearing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1739283\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Hearing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1739283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

人工耳蜗(CIs)的安全性、有效性和成功率已经得到了很好的证实,这也导致了临床医生决定谁应该接受人工耳蜗的标准发生了变化。临床决策的这种变化已经超过了监管机构和保险公司的适应症所发生的缓慢变化。我们回顾了CIs适应症的历史发展,包括美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)、医疗保险、医疗补助和私人保险公司的适应症。我们报告了扩展到包括有较大残余听力的患者,例如那些接受Hybrid和EAS设备的患者,并报告了最近FDA批准的对患者最佳辅助条件的重视程度降低,而更重视要治疗的耳朵。这包括将CIs扩展到单侧耳聋和不对称听力损失患者。我们回顾了用于确定候选资格的测试材料的变化,包括从安静句子到噪音句子的转变,以及最近使用的单音节单词和认知筛选措施。重要的是,我们讨论了最近推荐CIs的趋势,尽管患者不符合FDA或保险公司的适应症(一种称为“标签外”的做法),这可以作为当前适应症需要更新的证明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Adults: Limitations, Expansions, and Opportunities for Improvement.

The safety, efficacy, and success of cochlear implants (CIs) are well established and have led to changes in criteria used by clinicians to determine who should receive a CI. Such changes in clinical decision-making have out-paced the slower-occurring changes that have taken place with regulatory bodies' and insurers' indications. We review the historical development of indications for CIs, including those of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. We report on expansion to include patients with greater residual hearing, such as those who receive Hybrid and EAS devices, and report on recent FDA approvals that place less emphasis on the patient's best-aided condition and greater emphasis on the ear to be treated. This includes expansion of CIs to patients with single-side deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. We review changes in the test materials used to determine candidacy, including transition from sentences in quiet to sentences in noise to the recent use of monosyllabic words and cognitive screening measures. Importantly, we discuss the recent trend to recommend CIs despite a patient not meeting FDA or insurers' indications (a practice known as "off-label"), which serves as attestation that current indications need to be updated.

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
Seminars in Hearing
Seminars in Hearing Health Professions-Speech and Hearing
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Seminars in Hearing is a quarterly review journal that publishes topic-specific issues in the field of audiology including areas such as hearing loss, auditory disorders and psychoacoustics. The journal presents the latest clinical data, new screening and assessment techniques, along with suggestions for improving patient care in a concise and readable forum. Technological advances with regards to new auditory devices are also featured. The journal"s content is an ideal reference for both the practicing audiologist as well as an excellent educational tool for students who require the latest information on emerging techniques and areas of interest in the field.
×
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