International Consensus Statements on Intraoperative Testing for Cochlear Implantation Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: A wide variety of intraoperative tests are available in cochlear implantation. However, no consensus exists on which tests constitute the minimum necessary battery. We assembled an international panel of clinical experts to develop, refine, and vote upon a set of core consensus statements. DESIGN: A literature review was used to identify intraoperative tests currently used in the field and draft a set of provisional statements. For statement evaluation and refinement, we used a modified Delphi consensus panel structure. Multiple interactive rounds of voting, evaluation, and feedback were conducted to achieve convergence. RESULTS: Twenty-nine provisional statements were included in the original draft. In the first voting round, consensus was reached on 15 statements. Of the 14 statements that did not reach consensus, 12 were revised based on feedback provided by the expert practitioners, and 2 were eliminated. In the second voting round, 10 of the 12 revised statements reached a consensus. The two statements which did not achieve consensus were further revised and subjected to a third voting round. However, both statements failed to achieve consensus in the third round. In addition, during the final revision, one more statement was decided to be deleted due to overlap with another modified statement. CONCLUSIONS: A final core set of 24 consensus statements was generated, covering wide areas of intraoperative testing during CI surgery. These statements may provide utility as evidence-based guidelines to improve quality and achieve uniformity of surgical practice.

Functional Hearing Preservation in Cochlear Implantation: The Miami Cocktail Effect.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if pharmacological treatment with prednisone and L-N-acetylcysteine (STE + NAC) influence functional hearing preservation in cochlear implant (CI) surgery. STUDY DESIGNS: Preimplantation and postimplantation longitudinal case-control study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Pediatric and adult recipients of CI with preimplantation functional hearing defined as an average of air-conducted thresholds at 125, 250, and 500 Hz (low-frequency pure-tone average [LFPTA]) <80 dB. INTERVENTIONS: Preimplantation and postimplantation audiometry. Weight-adjusted oral prednisone and L-N-acetylcysteine starting 2 days before surgery (Miami cocktail). Prednisone was continued for 3 days and L-N-acetylcysteine for 12 days after surgery, respectively. Cochlear implantation with conventional length electrodes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients with LFPTA <80 dB, and LFPTA change at 1-year postimplantation. RESULTS: All 61 patients received intratympanic and intravenous dexamethasone intraoperatively, with 41 patients receiving STE + NAC and 20 patients not receiving STE + NAC. At 1-year postimplantation, the proportion of functional hearing preservation was 83% in the STE + NAC group compared with 55% of subjects who did not receive STE + NAC ( p = 0.0302). The median LFPTA change for STE + NAC-treated and not treated subjects was 8.33 dB (mean, 13.82 ± 17.4 dB) and 18.34 dB (mean, 26.5 ± 23.4 dB), respectively ( p = 0.0401, Wilcoxon rank test). Perioperative STE + NAC treatment resulted in 10 dB of LFPTA better hearing than when not receiving this treatment. Better low-frequency preimplantation hearing thresholds were predictive of postimplantation functional hearing. No serious side effects were reported. CONCLUSION: Perioperative STE + NAC, "The Miami Cocktail," was safe and superior to intraoperative steroids alone in functional hearing preservation 1-year after cochlear implantation.

Speech Discrimination Outcomes in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients by Primary Language and Bilingual Hispanic Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Compare cochlear implant (CI) outcomes in English speakers, Spanish speakers, and bilingual Hispanics. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Academic tertiary care center. METHODS: Eighty-five postlingually deafened adults unilaterally implanted between January 2014 and December 2018 were stratified by primary language. Primary outcomes were: (1) English consonant-nucleus-consonant and Spanish bisyllables word tests in quiet, and (2) English AzBio and Latin American Hearing In Noise Test (LA-HINT) sentence tests in quiet and in noise at multiple time-intervals postactivation. RESULTS: In the respective languages, primary Spanish speakers (n = 24), and English speakers (n = 61) experienced the greatest increases in average scores for word and sentence tests in quiet during the first 6 months postactivation, with gradual increases in average scores over time. English speakers performed significantly worse on AzBio tests in noise, compared to quiet, while the addition of noise did not significantly affect average LA-HINT scores in Spanish speakers across multiple time intervals. An early ceiling effect was also demonstrated for LA-HINT. Although not significant, bilingual Hispanics (n = 12) had lower average AzBio in quiet scores than English speakers and higher average LA-HINT in quiet scores than the Spanish speakers across multiple time intervals. CONCLUSION: English and Spanish CI users experienced the greatest increases in speech understanding in quiet the first few months after implant activation. An early ceiling effect is demonstrated with LA-HINT, indicating LA-HINT is not appropriate for evaluating longitudinal CI outcomes in Spanish speakers. Bilingual Hispanics represent a unique group, and further investigations are necessary to understand speech perception patterns in both languages and develop the best CI test strategies for these individuals.

Cochlear Implant Referral Criteria for the Spanish-Speaking Adult Population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the "60/60 Guideline" in a diverse patient population. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Data were collected for adult patients (18 years and older) who underwent a cochlear implant evaluation (CIE) between January 2016 and March 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Development of the "60/60 Guideline" has provided better clarity on when to refer English-speaking patients for a CIE. Our study evaluated the effectiveness of this referral tool in the Spanish-speaking population. RESULTS: In our group of patients who underwent a traditional CIE (n = 402), 209 met unaided and aided traditional cochlear implant (CI) candidacy criteria. Of the 193 individuals who did not meet both components of traditional candidacy criteria, a majority met the aided component (86%) but only 4.6% met the unaided component. When applying the 60/60 Guideline to patients who met traditional criteria, there is a sensitivity rating of 84.7% and a specificity index of 50.3%. For English and Spanish speakers who met traditional criteria but did not meet the 60/60 Guideline, a majority (83.3% English, 87.5% Spanish) had a better ear word recognition score (WRS) greater than 60%, suggesting the unaided WRS is the more restrictive component of the "60/60 Guideline." CONCLUSION: Application of the "60/60 Guideline" is an effective method to identify potential CI candidates in the English-speaking population; however, it was less effective in the Spanish-speaking population. Spanish-speaking adults should be referred for a CIE when better ear pure tone average is greater than 60 dB hearing loss, regardless of their unaided WRS. This study highlights the need for inclusion of nonlinguistic test measures in the CI referral criteria and test battery to reduce CI access barriers for patients who speak a language other than English.

Parents of children with hearing loss: Impact and exposure of COVID-19 on mental health.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact and exposure of COVID-19 on parent mental health (e.g., depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), for parents of children with hearing loss. The survey was distributed via an electronic survey to families subscribed to a pediatric program listserv as part of a university medical center. Fifty-five percent of parents reported elevated symptoms of anxiety, while 16% scored in the clinically significant range for depression. In addition, 20% of parents reported elevated symptoms of PTSD. Liner regressions found that impact of COVID-19 predicted anxiety symptoms, while both impact and exposure predicted depression and PTSD symptoms. In addition, both impact and exposure predicted COVID related parental distress. Exposure and impact of COVID-19 has had negative consequences on parents of children with hearing loss. Although exposure influenced parental mental health, impact uniquely affected depression and PTSD. Results highlight the need for mental health screening, as well implementation of psychological interventions using telehealth or in-person consultations. Future work should focus on post-pandemic challenges, including long-term psychological functioning due to the established relationship between parental mental health and pediatric outcomes.

Strategies for the implementation of the living guidelines for cochlear implantation in adults.

Introduction: Clinical guidelines for cochlear implants (CI) exist in several countries, however, they lack consistency and often do not encompass the full user journey. This study aims to explore the barriers and facilitators for implementing global Living Guidelines for cochlear implantation in adults with severe, profound or moderate sloping to profound sensorineural hearing loss (SPSNHL) as well as identify guideline implementation (GI) tools that may support uptake. Methods: A convenience sample of Task Force members were recruited for semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed to group country-specific barriers, facilitators and GI tools into three levels: health care provider (HCP), consumer and structural. Once identified, barriers and facilitators were classified into four themes related to awareness, economic, guideline or other. Results: Interviews were conducted with 38 Task Force members, representing 20 countries. Lack of CI and hearing loss awareness was a major barrier at the HCP (85% of countries), consumer (80%) and structural (20%) levels. Economic and guideline barriers followed at the HCP (35%; 25%), consumer (45%; 0%) and structural (55%; 30%) levels, respectively. Facilitators focused on raising awareness of hearing loss and CIs as well as guideline related initiates at the HCP (80%; 70%), consumer (70%; 10%) and structural (25%; 70%) levels. GI tools including education, economic evaluations, quick reference resources and social media can help improve awareness and uptake. Conclusion: Awareness is the primary barrier to implementing Living Guidelines globally for adults with SPSNHL. Endorsement from key professional bodies and using the best available evidence can enhance uptake.

Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults Using Bimodal Hearing Configurations.

Clinics are treating a growing number of patients with greater amounts of residual hearing. These patients often benefit from a bimodal hearing configuration in which acoustic input from a hearing aid on 1 ear is combined with electrical stimulation from a cochlear implant on the other ear. The current guidelines aim to review the literature and provide best practice recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of individuals with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who may benefit from bimodal hearing configurations. Specifically, the guidelines review: benefits of bimodal listening, preoperative and postoperative cochlear implant evaluation and programming, bimodal hearing aid fitting, contralateral routing of signal considerations, bimodal treatment for tinnitus, and aural rehabilitation recommendations.

Effects of Bilateral Cochlear Implantation on Binaural Listening Tasks for Younger and Older Adults.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the objective and subjective benefit of a second cochlear implant (CI) on binaural listening tasks of speech understanding in noise and localization in younger and older adults. We aimed to determine if the aging population can utilize binaural cues and obtain comparable benefits from bilateral CI (BIL_CI) when compared to the younger population. METHODS: Twenty-nine adults with severe to profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss were included. Participants were evaluated in two conditions, better CI (BE_CI) alone and BIL_CI using AzBio and Bamford-Kowal-Bench (BKB) sentence in noise tests. Localization tasks were completed in the BIL_CI condition using a broadband stimulus, low-frequency stimuli, and high-frequency stimuli. A subjective questionnaire was administered to assess satisfaction with CI. RESULTS: Older age was significantly associated with poorer performance on AzBio +5 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and BKB-speech in noise (SIN); however, improvements from BE_CI to BIL_CI were observed across all ages. In the AzBio +5 condition, nearly half of all participants achieved a significant improvement from BE_CI to BIL_CI with the majority of those occurring in patients younger than 65 years of age. Conversely, the majority of participants who achieved a significant improvement in BKB-SIN were adults >65 years of age. Years of BIL_CI experience and time between implants were not associated with performance. For localization, mean absolute error increased with age for low and high narrowband noise, but not for the broadband noise. Response gain was negatively correlated with age for all localization stimuli. Neither BIL_CI listening experience nor time between implants significantly impacted localization ability. Subjectively, participants report reduction in disability with the addition of the second CI. There is no observed relationship between age or speech recognition score and satisfaction with BIL_CI. CONCLUSION: Overall performance on binaural listening tasks was poorer in older adults than in younger adults. However, older adults were able to achieve significant benefit from the addition of a second CI, and performance on binaural tasks was not correlated with overall device satisfaction. The significance of the improvement was task and stimulus dependent but suggested a critical limit may exist for optimal performance on SIN tasks for CI users. Specifically, older adults require at least a +8 dB SNR to understand 50% of speech postoperatively; therefore, solely utilizing a fixed +5 dB SNR preoperatively to qualify CI candidates is not recommended as this test condition may introduce limitations in demonstrating CI benefit.

Comparison of Speech Test Outcomes After Cochlear Implantation in Patients With and Without Asymmetric Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVES: Determine whether asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) affects postoperative speech outcomes in cochlear implant (CI) patients. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Adult English-speaking patients with unilateral CIs implanted between 2014 and 2018 were stratified into NonAHL and AHL groups based on preoperative AzBio scores in quiet from the nonimplanted ear (0-50% vs. 51-100%, respectively). INTERVENTIONS: CI surgery in the poorer performing ear. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative consonant-nucleusconsonant (CNC) word and AzBio sentence test scores in quiet and/or noise at +5 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). RESULTS: Of 512 patients, 33 non-AHL and 27 AHL patients were included. Average ages were 65.6 and 63.6 years, respectively. As expected, preoperative AzBio scores in quiet from the nonimplanted ear were higher in the AHL group (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 66.4-76.4%) than the non-AHL group at baseline (95%CI: 12.3-23.6%). In both cohorts, AzBio scores in quiet from the implanted ear improved from baseline, with 24-month scores (95%CI: 73.8 - 84.9%) being higher than preoperative scores (95%CI: 13.2-23.1%). There were also significant differences in AzBio scores in quiet between cohorts overall (p  = 0.0120) on mixed model analysis, with the AHL group performing ∼6.4% better than the non-AHL group; however, differences were not significant when scores were stratified by time. In addition, there were no significant differences in CNC in quiet and AzBio scores in noise at +5 dB SNR between cohorts (p  = 0.1786 and p  = 0.6215, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: After CI, patients with AHL can achieve scores on word and sentence tests at least comparable to traditional CI candidates, supporting the expansion of CI candidacy to include patients with AHL.

Catchment Profile of Large Cochlear Implant Centers in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the catchment area and patient profile of large cochlear implant (CI) centers in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Multi-institutional retrospective case series. SETTING: Tertiary referral CI centers. METHODS: Patients who underwent CI surgery at 7 participating CI centers between 2015 and 2020 were identified. Patients' residential zip codes were used to approximate travel distances and urban vs rural residential areas. RESULTS: Over the 6-year study period (2015-2020), 6313 unique CI surgical procedures occurred (4529 adult, 1784 pediatric). Between 2015 and 2019, CI procedures increased by 43%. Patients traveled a median 52 miles (interquartile range, 21-110) each way; patients treated at rural CI centers traveled greater distances vs those treated at urban centers (72 vs 46 miles, P < .001). Rural residents represented 61% of the patient population and traveled farther than urban residents (73 vs 24 miles, P < .001). Overall, 91% of patients lived within a 200-mile radius of the institution, while 71% lived within a 100-mile radius. In adults, multiple regression analysis redemonstrated an association between greater travel distances and (1) older age at the time of CI and (2) residential rural setting (both P < .001, r2 = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: While large CI centers serve geographically dispersed populations, most patients reside within a 200-mile radius. Strategies to expand CI utilization may leverage remote programming, telemedicine, and strategic placement of new centers and satellite clinics to ameliorate travel burden.

Decoding Billing Practices in Cochlear Implant Programs.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine current cochlear implant (CI) billing practices across CI audiologists in the United States, to determine if CI audiologists are following the National Correct Coding Initiative (NCCI) edits, and to assess the CI audiologist's exposure to billing education. DESIGN: A 48-question survey was electronically distributed to and completed by audiologists who bill for CI services. Demographic data including work setting, population served, years of experience, number of CI patients managed per week, and exposure to billing education were collected. Data were analyzed to identify codes and modifiers used to bill for commonly performed CI procedures such as unilateral and bilateral CI programming, preoperative and postoperative testing, and objective measures. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 96 audiologists. The majority (86.3%, n = 82) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed they understand billing and coding practices for cochlear implants and 94.7% (n = 89) rated themselves as somewhat to highly efficient when performing these practices. Only 16.8% (n = 16) of respondents reported receiving formal training for practice management, and half of the respondents (51.1%, n = 48) reported unfamiliarity with national billing guidelines. Those who received formal training reported higher billing efficiency. Wide variability was seen for various billing scenarios. Billing questions were presented, and answers were coded as correct or incorrect based on the NCCI edits. Respondents who reported higher agreement with understanding billing and who received formal training scored better on common billing questions related to the NCCI edits. CONCLUSIONS: Most CI audiologists rated themselves as efficient in billing; however, wide variance in billing practices was observed. Incorporating practice management and current billing education into daily practice and into audiology training programs is essential to clinic efficiency, practice management, and CI program viability. CI audiologists should be knowledgeable about appropriate billing practices to ensure long-term sustainability of programs.

Screening Strategies for Deafness Genes and Functional Outcomes in Cochlear Implant Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To review the current state of knowledge about the influence of specific genetic mutations that cause sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) on cochlear implant (CI) functional outcomes, and how this knowledge may be integrated into clinical practice. A multistep and sequential population-based genetic algorithm suitable for the identification of congenital SNHL mutations before CI placement is also examined. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION: A review was performed of the English literature from 2000 to 2019 using PubMed regarding the influence of specific mutations on CI outcomes and the use of next-generation sequencing for genetic screening of CI patients. CONCLUSION: CI is an effective habilitation option for patients with severe-profound congenital SNHL. However, it is well known that CI outcomes show substantial inter-patient variation. Recent advances in genetic studies have improved our understanding of genotype-phenotype relationships for many of the mutations underlying congenital SNHL, and have explored how these relationships may account for some of the variance seen in CI performance outcomes. A sequential genetic screening strategy utilizing next-generation sequencing-based population-specific gene panels may allow for more efficient mutation identification before CI placement. Understanding the relationships between specific mutations and CI outcomes along with integrating routine comprehensive genetic testing into pre-CI evaluations will allow for more effective patient counseling and open the door for the development of mutation-specific treatment strategies.

The Effects of Paired versus Sequential Stimulation on Speech Recognition Outcomes of Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients.

PURPOSE: Cochlear implant (CI) sound-processing strategies are important to the overall success of a CI recipient. This study aimed to determine the effects of 2 Advanced Bionics (AB) CI-processing strategies, Optima-S and Optima-P, on speech recognition outcomes in adult CI users. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was completed at a tertiary academic medical center. Seventeen post-lingually deafened adult CI users (median age = 58.6 years; age range: 23.5-78.9 years) with long-term use of a paired sound-processing strategy (Optima-P) were reprogrammed with a sequential strategy (Optima-S). Demographic data and speech recognition scores with pre- and post-intervention analyses were collected and compared with respect to the 95% confidence interval for common CI word and sentence recognition tests. RESULTS: Using Optima-S sound-processing strategy, all patients (100%) performed equivalent or better on word and sentence testing than with Optima-P. More specifically, 17.6, 41.2, and 58.8% of the patients performed above the 95% confidence interval for speech recognition conditions of monosyllabic words, sentences in quiet, and sentences in noise, respectively. All patients (100%) selected Optima-S as their preferred strategy for future CI use. CONCLUSION: Speech recognition performance with Optima-S processing strategy was stable or improved compared to results with Optima-P in all tested conditions, and subjective preference of Optima-S was selected by all patients. Given these results, CI clinicians should consider programming AB CI users with Optima-S sound-processing strategy to optimize overall speech recognition performance.

Prevalence of Depression and Anxiety in Adolescents With Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and implement a universal screening protocol for depression and anxiety in adolescents serviced in an otology and audiology practice and to estimate the prevalence of depression and anxiety in adolescents with hearing loss, while also comparing rates by degree of hearing loss and type of hearing device used. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: University tertiary medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred four adolescents 12- to 18-years-old who attended an otology clinic in a large metropolitan hospital in the southeastern United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: (s): Depression (PHQ-8), anxiety (GAD-7), degree of hearing loss, type of hearing loss, and type of hearing device utilized. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of adolescents scored above the clinical cutoff on at least one of the depression and/or anxiety measures, with 10% scoring in the elevated range on both measures. Specifically, 17% scored above the cutoff on the PHQ-8 and 16% scored in the clinically significant range for the GAD-7. An additional 30 and 21% scored in the at-risk range for depression and anxiety, respectively. Older adolescents were more likely to score within the elevated range for depression (r = 0.232, p = 0.026). Also, adolescents with severe to profound hearing loss had higher rates of depression and anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of mental health screening is needed in otology and audiology practices both to identify those who require psychological support and to provide appropriate treatment to reduce long-term impact of hearing loss on quality of life and mental health functioning in adolescents.

Unilateral Cochlear Implants for Severe, Profound, or Moderate Sloping to Profound Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Consensus Statements.

Importance: Cochlear implants are a treatment option for individuals with severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) who receive little or no benefit from hearing aids; however, cochlear implantation in adults is still not routine. Objective: To develop consensus statements regarding the use of unilateral cochlear implants in adults with severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral SNHL. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was a modified Delphi consensus process that was informed by a systematic review of the literature and clinical expertise. Searches were conducted in the following databases: (1) MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Ovid MEDLINE, (2) Embase, and (3) the Cochrane Library. Consensus statements on cochlear implantation were developed using the evidence identified. This consensus process was relevant for the use of unilateral cochlear implantation in adults with severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral SNHL. The literature searches were conducted on July 18, 2018, and the 3-step Delphi consensus method took place over the subsequent 9-month period up to March 30, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: A Delphi consensus panel of 30 international specialists voted on consensus statements about cochlear implantation, informed by an SR of the literature and clinical expertise. This vote resulted in 20 evidence-based consensus statements that are in line with clinical experience. A modified 3-step Delphi consensus method was used to vote on and refine the consensus statements. This method consisted of 2 rounds of email questionnaires and a face-to-face meeting of panel members at the final round. All consensus statements were reviewed, discussed, and finalized at the face-to-face meeting. Results: In total, 6492 articles were identified in the searches of the electronic databases. After removal of duplicate articles, 74 articles fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria and were used to create the 20 evidence-based consensus statements. These 20 consensus statements on the use of unilateral cochlear implantation in adults with SNHL were relevant to the following 7 key areas of interest: level of awareness of cochlear implantation (1 consensus statement); best practice clinical pathway from diagnosis to surgery (3 consensus statements); best practice guidelines for surgery (2 consensus statements); clinical effectiveness of cochlear implantation (4 consensus statements); factors associated with postimplantation outcomes (4 consensus statements); association between hearing loss and depression, cognition, and dementia (5 consensus statements); and cost implications of cochlear implantation (1 consensus statement). Conclusions and Relevance: These consensus statements represent the first step toward the development of international guidelines on best practices for cochlear implantation in adults with SNHL. Further research to develop consensus statements for unilateral cochlear implantation in children, bilateral cochlear implantation, combined electric-acoustic stimulation, unilateral cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness, and asymmetrical hearing loss in children and adults may be beneficial for optimizing hearing and quality of life for these patients.

Factors Influencing Time to Cochlear Implantation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine demographic and audiologic factors associated with time to treatment with cochlear implantation. METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained adult cochlear implant database. A total of 492 patients were implanted from 2012 to 2017. Time to implantation, preimplantation audiologic outcomes, and demographic data were collected. Multivariate analysis was undertaken to establish demographic/audiologic factors that predict time to cochlear implantation. RESULTS: Using multivariate analysis, nonwhite race (hazard ratio 0.157, p = 0.038) and increased age (hazard ratio 0.970, p = 0.038) were associated with increased time to cochlear implantation. Nonwhite patients had significantly higher pure-tone averages and lower speech recognition scores (consonant-nucleus-consonant words and AzBio sentences in quiet) and were less likely to use hearing aids as compared with white patients (all p < 0.001). Sex (p = 0.188), health insurance type (p = 0.255), preoperative hearing aid use (p = 0.174), and audiologic outcomes were not significant predictors of time to implantation. CONCLUSION: Nonwhite patients have poorer preoperative hearing and speech recognition and lower hearing aid use and are at risk for delay in referral and treatment for severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Other demographic factors, notably health insurance status, did not significantly predict time to cochlear implantation. Given the observed hearing healthcare disparities, special outreach programs may be needed to ensure timely cochlear implantation and effective hearing screening and rehabilitation.

When to replace legacy cochlear implants for technological upgrades: Indications and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine indications, surgical efficacy, and audiologic outcomes of replacing Advanced Bionics Clarion C1.2 internal devices (Advanced Bionics, LLC, Valencia, CA) as a means of technology upgrade. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review, case series. METHODS: Ten patients were initially implanted as a child (mean age = 3.87 years) and underwent cochlear implant reimplantation (CIR) with current Advanced Bionics internal device as a young adult (mean duration of implant use = 15.66 years). Demographic data and pre- and post-CIR speech perception scores were collected. RESULTS: Technology upgrade was the primary (9) or secondary (1) motivation for CIR. No surgical complications were noted, and full insertion was obtained in nine cases. Intraoperative impedance levels and neural response imaging measures were within normal limits for eight patients. At most recent post-CIR follow-up evaluation, all patients (100%) performed within or better than the 95% confidence interval of their pre-CIR word and sentence recognition scores; and 55.6%, 50.0%, and 50.0% of patients performed above the 95% confidence interval of their pre-CIR scores for the CNC words, sentences in quiet, and sentences in noise, respectively. CONCLUSION: Post-CIR audiological benefit was stable or improved compared to pre-CIR results in all categories by 3 months after reactivation. Given these results, patients who are unable to use the most current external processors due to incompatibility with a legacy internal device could consider reimplanation to optimize their overall performance with a cochlear implant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 129:748-753, 2019.

Evaluation of Outcome Variability Associated With Lateral Wall, Mid-scalar, and Perimodiolar Electrode Arrays When Controlling for Preoperative Patient Characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the impact of electrode array selection on audiometric performance when controlling for baseline patient characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation of a prospective cochlear implant (CI) database (January 1, 2012-May 31, 2017). SETTING: Tertiary Care University Hospital. PATIENTS: Three hundred twenty-eight adult CI recipients. INTERVENTIONS/MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Hearing outcomes were measured through unaided/aided pure tone thresholds and speech recognition testing before and after cochlear implantation. All reported postoperative results were performed at least 6 months after CI activation. All device manufacturers were represented. RESULTS: Of the 328 patients, 234 received lateral wall (LW) arrays, 46 received perimodiolar (PM) arrays, and 48 received mid-scalar (MS) arrays. Patients receiving PM arrays had significantly poorer preoperative earphone and aided PTAs and SRTs, and aided Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant(CNC) word and AzBio +10 SNR scores compared with patients receiving LW arrays (all p ≤ 0.04), and poorer PTAs and AzBio +10 SNR scores compared with MS recipients (all p ≤ 0.02). No preoperative audiological variables were found to significantly differ between MS and LW patients. After controlling for preoperative residual hearing and speech recognition ability in a hierarchical multiple regression analysis, no statistically significant difference in audiological outcomes was detected (CNC words, AzBio quiet, or AzBio +10 SNR) among the three electrode array types (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: While previous studies have demonstrated superior postoperative speech recognition scores in LW electrode array recipients, these differences lose significance when controlling for baseline hearing and speech recognition ability. These data demonstrate the proclivity for implanting individuals with greater residual hearing with LW electrodes and its impact on postoperative results.

Earphone and Aided Word Recognition Differences in Cochlear Implant Candidates.

OBJECTIVE: Compare word recognition scores for adults undergoing cochlear implant evaluations (CIE) measured using earphones and hearing aids. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of data obtained during adult CIEs. SETTING: Tertiary cochlear implant center. PATIENTS: Two hundred eight ears in 183 subjects with greater than 10% word recognition scores measured with earphones. INTERVENTIONS/MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Preoperative pure-tone thresholds and word recognition scores measured with earphones and hearing aids. RESULTS: A review of audiological data obtained from 2012 to 2017 during adult CIEs was conducted. Overall, a weak positive correlation (r = 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.17-0.40, p < 0.001) was observed between word recognition scores measured with earphones and hearing aids. Earphone to aided differences (EAD) ranged from -38 to +72% (mean 14.3 ±â€Š19.9%). Consistent with EADs, 108 ears (51.9%) had earphone scores that were significantly higher than aided word recognition scores (+EAD), as determined by 95% confidence intervals; for 14 ears (6.7%), earphone scores were significantly lower than aided scores (-EAD). Moreover, of the patients with earphone word recognition scores ≥50%, 82.6% were CI candidates based on aided AzBio+10 dB SNR scores. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the limited diagnostic value of word recognition scores measured under earphones for patients undergoing CIE. Nevertheless, aided word recognition is rarely measured before CIEs, which limits the information available to determine CI candidacy and referral for CIEs. Earlier and routine measurement of aided word recognition may help guide clinical decision making by determining the extent to which patients are achieving maximum benefit with their hearing aids or should consider cochlear implantation.

Use of Adult Patient Focus Groups to Develop the Initial Item Bank for a Cochlear Implant Quality-of-Life Instrument.

Importance: No instrument exists to assess quality of life (QOL) in adult cochlear implant (CI) users that has been developed and validated using accepted scientific standards. Objective: To develop a CI-specific QOL instrument for adults in accordance with the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) guidelines. Design, Setting, and Participants: As required in the PROMIS guidelines, patient focus groups participated in creation of the initial item bank. Twenty-three adult CI users were divided into 1 of 3 focus groups stratified by word recognition ability. Three moderator-led focus groups were conducted based on grounded theory on December 3, 2016. Two reviewers independently analyzed focus group recordings and transcripts, with a third reviewer available to resolve discrepancies. All data were reviewed and reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research. The setting was a tertiary referral center. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coded focus group data. Results: The 23 focus group participants (10 [43%] female; mean [range] age, 68.1 [46.2-84.2] years) represented a wide range of income levels, education levels, listening modalities, CI device manufacturers, duration of CI use, and age at implantation. Data saturation was determined to be reached before the conclusion of each of the focus groups. After analysis of the transcripts, the central themes identified were communication, emotion, environmental sounds, independence and work function, listening effort, social isolation and ability to socialize, and sound clarity. Cognitive interviews were carried out on 20 adult CI patients who did not participate in the focus groups to ensure item clarity. Based on these results, the initial QOL item bank and prototype were developed. Conclusions and Relevance: Patient focus groups drawn from the target population are the preferred method of identifying content areas and domains for developing the item bank for a CI-specific QOL instrument. Compared with previously used methods, the use of patient-centered item development for a CI-specific QOL instrument will more accurately reflect patient experience and increase our understanding of how CI use affects QOL.