Estimated Costs Associated With Management of Otosclerosis With Hearing Aids vs Surgery in Europe.

Importance: Surgery and hearing aids have similar outcomes in terms of hearing acuity but differ in terms of cost, aesthetics, and patient quality of life. The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of otosclerosis treatments have never been studied in Europe. Objectives: To compare the estimated mean costs per patient over 10 years of surgery vs hearing aids for the treatment of otosclerosis and to estimate the budget impact of an increase in the proportion of patients receiving surgical treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation analyzed French and European epidemiological data on the surgical management of symptomatic otosclerosis and compared them with data from the literature to build economic models. The analysis was conducted in January 2021. Exposures: Two care pathways were considered in the treatment of otosclerosis, either hearing aid or surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs were studied over 10 years using Markov models of the 2 care pathways (hearing aid vs surgery). The budget impact analysis was performed over 5 and 10 years, assuming a 1-percentage point yearly increase in the proportion of patients receiving surgical treatment. Results: Over 10 years, the estimated mean cost per patient was significantly lower in the surgery group compared with the hearing aid group (€3446.9 vs €6088.4; mean difference, -€2641.5; 95% CI -€4064.8 to -€1379.4 [US $3913.4 vs US $6912.4; mean difference, -US $2999.0; 95% CI, -US $4614.9 to -US $1566.1]). Increasing surgical treatment by 1 percentage point per year for 10 years would lead to overall savings of €1 762 304 (US $2 000 798) in France, with an increase of €1 322 920 (US $1 501 952) at 10 years for the public health insurance system and a decrease of €3 085 224 (US $3 502 750) at 10 years for patients and private health insurers. Sensitivity analyses showed that these results were robust. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that in France, treating otosclerosis surgically is slightly less expensive over 10 years than using hearing aids, when considering all payers. The proposed models developed in this study could be adjusted to perform the same analysis in other countries.

An Assessment of the Clinical Acceptability of Direct Acoustic Cochlear Implantation for Adults With Advanced Otosclerosis in the United Kingdom.

HYPOTHESIS: Assess the clinical acceptability of direct acoustic cochlear implantation for patients with advanced otosclerosis and the support for conducting a controlled trial of its effectiveness in the United Kingdom. BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence supports the efficacy of direct acoustic cochlear implantation in patients with advanced otosclerosis whose needs cannot be managed using the combination of stapes surgery and hearing aids. A controlled trial would provide evidence for its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to healthcare commissioners. METHODS: An online survey of clinical professionals was constructed to characterize current standard of care for patients with advanced otosclerosis and to assess whether clinicians would be willing to refer patients into a trial to evaluate direct acoustic cochlear implantation. A consensus process was conducted to define inclusion criteria for the future trial. RESULTS: No survey respondent considered direct acoustic cochlear implantation to be inappropriate with a majority indicating that they would refer patients into a future trial. The consensus was that there is a lack of available treatment options for those patients with bone conduction thresholds worse than 55 dB HL and who did not meet current criteria for cochlear implantation. CONCLUSION: The present study confirms that a controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of direct acoustic cochlear implantation would have the support of clinicians in the United Kingdom. A feasibility study would be required to determine whether patients who meet the inclusion criteria could be recruited in a timely manner and in sufficient numbers to conduct a formal evaluation of effectiveness.

High-fidelity, inexpensive surgical middle ear simulator.

HYPOTHESIS: A high-fidelity, inexpensive middle ear simulator could be created to enhance surgical training that would be rated as having high face validity by experts. BACKGROUND: With rapid prototyping using additive manufacturing technology (AMT), one can create high-resolution 3-dimensional replicas of the middle ear at low cost and high fidelity. Such a simulator could be of great benefit for surgical training, particularly in light of new resident training guidelines. METHODS: AMT was used to create surgical middle ear simulator (SMS) with 2 different materials simulating bone and soft tissue. The simulator is composed of an outer box with dimensions of an average adult external auditory canal without scutum and an inner cartridge based on an otosclerosis model. The simulator was then rated by otology experts in terms of face validity and fidelity as well as their opinion on the usefulness of such a device. RESULTS: Eighteen otologists from 6 tertiary academic centers rated the simulator; 83.3% agreed or highly agreed that SMS has accurate dimensions and 66.6% that it has accurate tactile feedback. When asked if performance of stapedotomy with the SMS improves with practice, 46% agreed. As to whether practicing stapedotomy with the SMS translates to improvement with live surgery, 78% agreed with this statement. Experts' average rating of the components of SMS (of possible 5) was as follows: middle ear dimensions, 3.9; malleus, 3.7; incus, 3.6; stapes, 3.6; chorda tympani, 3.7; tensor tympani, 4.1; stapedius, 3.8; facial nerve, 3.7; and promontory, 3.5. Overall, 83% found SMS to be at least "very useful" in training of novices, particularly for junior and senior residents. CONCLUSION: Most experts found the SMS to be accurate, but there was a large discrepancy in rating of individual components. Most found it to be very useful for training of novice surgeons. With these results, we are encouraged to proceed with further refinements that will strengthen the SMS as a training tool for otologic surgery.