Hearing Aids

BackgroundThe opportunity to assess cochlear implant outcomes remotely provides the potential to streamline delivery of care for cochlear implant users. However, the conditions required for its implementation into clinic systems must be fully understood to ensure success and sustainability. The objectives of this study were to (i) use a discrete choice experiment quantify the preferences of cochlear implant users when considering use of Cochlear Remote CheckTM, a remote assessment service, and (ii) explore the perceptions, insights and attitudes of CI users that may influence utilisation of a remote service.DesignA discrete choice experiment was administrated to Australian adult cochlear implant users via an online survey. Participants chose between pairs of hypothetical clinical service options for three different clinical scenarios (acute care, troubleshooting and long-term review). Participants answered a series of questions focusing on how and when remote services should be discussed and offered within their hearing journey.ResultsA total of 124 adult cochlear implant users completed the survey. Conditional logit analysis revealed the strongest participant preference was clinician continuity for assessment review, followed by low service costs. They preferred to receive assessment results within one week of completion, but not by videoconference/call in the acute care scenario. Only 12% of participants preferred in-clinic visits for all scenarios. Notably, 100% of participants felt that cochlear implant users should be made aware of remote service opportunities available to them.ConclusionStudy participants placed high importance on clinician continuity, but preferences for timing and delivery of results were less pronounced. This information can help to inform customisation of remote services by individual clinics. Costs and payment infrastructure for providing remote care require careful consideration. Whilst there is an appetite for use of Remote CheckTM alongside clinic visits, it is not suitable for, nor preferred by, all cochlear implant users.

This study examined relationships between cochlear implant-aided speech recognition, sound quality ratings, and quality of life outcomes in 41 adult cochlear implant users. Participants completed word and sentence recognition tasks, the Speech, Spatial and Qualities (SSQ) questionnaire, and the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL) questionnaire. Sound quality ratings on SSQ showed a weak correlation with sentence recognition in noise but strong positive correlations with CIQOL scores. Sound quality independently predicted quality of life, explaining 32% of global score variance, while speech recognition measures showed no effects. These findings highlight sound quality as a distinct and meaningful outcome metric.

ObjectivesHealthcare systems contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions through energy consumption and waste generation. This study aims to explore strategies to make cochlear implantation processes more environmentally sustainable and aligned with the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals.MethodsWe examined various approaches including the use of bio-based and biodegradable materials, sustainable energy solutions, greener anesthetic practices, effective waste separation and recycling in operating rooms, and patient-centered strategies such as reducing travel and promoting early activation and fitting of cochlear implants.ResultsEstablishing a 'Green Team' was identified as a key factor to raise awareness and motivation for sustainability initiatives. Implementing these strategies can significantly reduce the environmental footprint of cochlear implantation by decreasing surgical waste, lowering energy consumption, and minimizing patient-related emissions.ConclusionBy adopting these sustainable practices, the cochlear implant field can reduce its environmental impact, contribute meaningfully to global sustainability efforts, and enhance patient well-being, positioning itself as a leader in healthcare sustainability.

PurposeThis study aimed (1) to determine the biological basis of the interphase gap (IPG) effect and (2) to identify the most informative parameters, analytical methods, and quantitative scales for evaluating the IPG effect in human cochlear implant (CI) users.MethodsThe IPG effect was quantified using multiple parameters, analytical methods, and quantitative scales (three combinations using linear or logarithmic scales for the input and output variables) across three pediatric CI groups with differing cochlear nerve (CN) anatomy: children with cochlear nerve deficiency (CND), GJB2 mutations, and idiopathic sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). All participants in the GJB2 and idiopathic SNHL groups had normal-sized CNs (NSCNs) in the test ear. Neural synchrony, a property depending on neural health, was assessed using phase locking value (PLV) and compared between children with CND and those with GJB2 mutations.ResultsThe PLV did not differ significantly between the CND and GJB2 groups, nor did it correlate with the IPG effect in GJB2 cases, regardless of parameter, analytical method, or quantitative scale. In contrast, consistent group differences in IPG effects on stimulation level offset and maximum slope of the eCAP input/output function were observed across all analytical methods and quantitative scales. The sensitivity of other eCAP measures-threshold, maximum amplitude, and overall linear slope-to group differences varied by quantitative scale.ConclusionsThe IPG effect primarily reflects the number of active CN fibers rather than their health. Stimulation level offset and the IPG effect on maximum slope are robust indicators of CN fiber counts in CI users and are unaffected by the choice of quantitative scale.