The Impact of Patient Factors on Objective Cochlear Implant Verification Using Acoustic Cortical Auditory-Evoked Potentials.

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is a major global public health issue that negatively impacts quality of life, communication, cognition, social participation, and mental health. The cochlear implant (CI) is the most efficacious treatment for severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. However, variability in outcomes remains high among CI users. Our previous research demonstrated that the existing subjective methodology of CI programming does not consistently produce optimal stimulation for speech perception, thereby limiting the potential for CI users to derive the maximum device benefit to achieve their peak potential. We demonstrated the benefit of utilising the objective method of measuring auditory-evoked cortical responses to speech stimuli as a reliable tool to guide and verify CI programming and, in turn, significantly improve speech perception performance. The present study was designed to investigate the impact of patient- and device-specific factors on the application of acoustically-evoked cortical auditory-evoked potential (aCAEP) measures as an objective clinical tool to verify CI mapping in adult CI users with bilateral deafness (BD). METHODS: aCAEP responses were elicited using binaural peripheral auditory stimulation for four speech tokens (/m/, /g/, /t/, and /s/) and recorded by HEARLab™ software in adult BD CI users. Participants were classified into groups according to subjective or objective CI mapping procedures to elicit present aCAEP responses to all four speech tokens. The impact of patient- and device-specific factors on the presence of aCAEP responses and speech perception was investigated between participant groups. RESULTS: Participants were categorised based on the presence or absence of the P1-N1-P2 aCAEP response to speech tokens. Out of the total cohort of adult CI users (n = 132), 63 participants demonstrated present responses pre-optimisation, 37 participants exhibited present responses post-optimisation, and the remaining 32 participants either showed an absent response for at least one speech token post-optimisation or did not accept the optimised CI map adjustments. Overall, no significant correlation was shown between patient and device-specific factors and the presence of aCAEP responses or speech perception scores. CONCLUSION: This study reinforces that aCAEP measures offer an objective, non-invasive approach to verify CI mapping, irrespective of patient or device factors. These findings further our understanding of the importance of personalised CI rehabilitation through CI mapping to minimise the degree of speech perception variation post-CI and allow all CI users to achieve maximum device benefit.

Intraoperative Compound Action Potentials as a Predictor of Postoperative Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials in Cochlear Implant Users.

INTRODUCTION: Electrically evoked cortical auditory evoked potentials (ECAEPs) are central brain responses to auditory stimuli that correlate with postoperative cochlear implant (CI) hearing outcomes. They differ from electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) which are peripheral responses that can be elicited intraoperatively and may also predict CI hearing outcomes. It is not known to what degree ECAP and ECAEP responses are associated with each other. Such a correlation, if present, may allow for an earlier and more accurate prediction of postoperative hearing outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective study involved 42 adult CI users. Threshold levels and amplitude growth function slopes of intraoperative ECAPs were compared to the latencies and peak-to-peak amplitudes of postoperative ECAEP responses at three different cochlear electrode array sites (apical, medial, and basal). RESULTS: A weak positive relationship was found between intraoperative ECAP thresholds and ECAEP N1-P2 peak-to-peak amplitude (r = 0.301, p = 0.005). Time between ECAP and ECAEP measurements was weakly correlated with P1-N1 peak-to-peak amplitude (r = 0.321, p = 0.002) and ECAEP N1-P2 peak-to-peak amplitude (r = 0.340, p = 0.001). ECAP amplitude growth function slopes varied by electrode location (χ2 = 26.701, df = 2, p = 0. 000002). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that intraoperative ECAP responses do not robustly predict postoperative ECAEP responses, providing caution against the use of ECAPs as a predictive tool for CI hearing outcomes.

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.

Holistic assessment of cochlear implant outcomes using the international classification of functioning disability and health model: data analysis of a longitudinal prospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE: To study outcome after cochlear implantation using the Cochlear Implant (CI) outcome assessment protocol based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model (CI-ICF). METHODS: Raw data of a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter study was analyzed. Seventy-two CI candidates were assessed preoperatively and six months postoperatively using the CI-ICF protocol. Following tools were used: (1) Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ), (2) Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), (3) Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ), (4) Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12), (5) Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index (HISQUI19), (6) Nijmegen CI Questionnaire (NCIQ) (7) pure tone audiometry, (8) speech audiometry, (9) sound localization. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement of speech discrimination in quiet (p = 0.015; p < 0.001) and in noise (p = 0.041; p < 0.001), sound detection (p < 0.001), tinnitus (p = 0.026), listening (p < 0.001), communicating with-receiving-spoken messages (p < 0.001), conversation (p < 0.001), family relationships (p < 0.001), community life (p = 0.019), NCIQ total score and all subdomain scores (p < 0.001). Subjective sound localization significantly improved (p < 0.001), while psychometric sound localization did not. There was no significant subjective deterioration of vestibular functioning and no substantial change in sound aversiveness. CI users reported a high level of implant satisfaction postoperatively. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the positive impact of cochlear implantation on auditory performance, communication, and subjective well-being. The CI-ICF protocol provides a holistic and comprehensive view of the evolution of CI outcomes.

Minimum intraoperative testing battery for cochlear implantation: the international practice trend.

PURPOSE: In cochlear implantation (CI) surgery, there are a wide variety of intraoperative tests available. However, no clear guide exists on which tests must be performed as the minimum intraoperative testing battery. Toward this end, we studied the usage patterns, recommendations, and attitudes of practitioners toward intraoperative testing. METHODS: This study is a multicentric international survey of tertiary referral CI centers. A survey was developed and administered to a group of CI practitioners (n = 34) including otologists, audiologists and biomedical engineers. Thirty six participants were invited to participate in this study based on a their scientific outputs to the literature on the intraoperative testing in CI field and based on their high load of CI surgeries. Thirty four, from 15 countries have accepted the invitation to participate. The participants were asked to indicate the usage trends, perceived value, influence on decision making and duration of each intraoperative test. They were also asked to indicate which tests they believe should be included in a minimum test battery for routine cases. RESULTS: Thirty-two (94%) experts provided responses. The most frequently recommended tests for a minimum battery were facial nerve monitoring, electrode impedance measurements, and measurements of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs). The perceived value and influence on surgical decision-making also varied, with high-resolution CT being rated the highest on both measures. CONCLUSION: Facial nerve monitoring, electrode impedance measurements, and ECAP measurements are currently the core tests of the intraoperative test battery for CI surgery.

Extended scope audiology clinic - a review of its outcomes and re-presentation to the ear nose and throat service.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of Extended Scope (ES) audiologists in managing adult Ear Nose and Throat (ENT)/Otology waitlists and analyse patient re-presentation rate to the ENT service within 12 months of being discharged from the clinic. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study assessing the efficacy of ES audiologists, measuring the discharge rate from ENT waitlists, the rate of escalation to ENT care, and the rate and reasons for any re-presentations to care. STUDY SAMPLE: 394 adult patients. RESULTS: Of the referred patients, 95% (n = 374) were deemed suitable for ES care. Of these, 75% were discharged without further ENT intervention, 20% required escalation to ENT, and 5% were returned to the waitlist. Only one patient re-presented for care within 12 months. The inclusion of patients with CHL/MHL and vestibular symptoms marked an expansion from our previous work. The re-presentation rate was notably lower compared to other allied health ES clinics. CONCLUSION: The ES Audiology clinic demonstrates a high discharge rate with a low incidence of patient re-presentation, highlighting the ES audiologists' efficiency in managing non-urgent ENT cases. The study supports the continued use and expansion of ES roles to ensuring timely and quality care for patients on ENT waitlists.

Direct Elicitation of Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials by Electrical Stimulation and Their Use to Verify the Most Comfortable Level of Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Users.

INTRODUCTION: This study was designed to investigate the use of electrically evoked cortical auditory evoked potentials (eCAEPs) as a tool for cochlear implant (CI) verification, the relationships between the site and intensity of stimulation and the detection rates and morphologies of eCAEPs as well as investigate whether correlations exist between the morphologies of eCAEPs and speech perception in quiet and in noise, duration of hearing loss, age at implantation, whether the hearing loss bilateral or single-sided and the electrode current level required to elicit MCL stimulation. METHODS: 32 adult unilateral CI users with postlingual hearing loss were enrolled. The stimuli were 1 kHz biphasic alternating pulses and were presented at either the behaviorally measured MCL or 50% of this value (MCL0.5) via the CI fitting software. Pulses were directed to apical, medial, or basal electrodes. CAEPs were recorded from a scalp electrode placed at the vertex, low forehead, and contralateral mastoid and were evaluated by two electrophysiologists. RESULTS: Overall, eCAEPs could be detected in 31/32 users when stimulating at MCL, and in 29/32 users when stimulating at MCL0.5. The detection rates were 31, 31, and 28/32 for apical, medial, and basal stimulation at MCL, and 29, 29, and 26/32 at MCL0.5. Significant differences in eCAEP amplitudes and latencies were observed across electrodes and stimulation levels. No significant correlations were found between eCAEP latencies and amplitudes and user age, duration of deafness prior to CI surgery, or with bilateral versus single-sided hearing loss, nor with the charge level required to elicit MCL, or with speech perception scores in quiet. Peak latencies correlated with speech perception scores in some configurations of speech-in-noise. CONCLUSION: eCAEPs can readily be elicited in the majority of adult CI users and show normal waveform characteristics at stimulation levels corresponding to MCL, as well as at basal, medial, and apical electrode stimulation sites. Neither the latencies nor amplitudes of eCAEPs are confounded by variables of age, duration of deafness prior to CI surgery, or the laterality of hearing loss. eCAEPs are a useful, objective method evaluate sound perception in CI users.

Event-Related Potentials of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users: Using a Semantic Oddball Paradigm in Noise.

INTRODUCTION: In individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD), who are characterised by profound hearing loss in one ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear, binaural input is no longer present. A cochlear implant (CI) can restore functional hearing in the profoundly deaf ear, with previous literature demonstrating improvements in speech-in-noise intelligibility with the CI. However, we currently have limited understanding of the neural processes involved (e.g., how the brain integrates the electrical signal produced by the CI with the acoustic signal produced by the normal hearing ear) and how modulation of these processes with a CI contributes to improved speech-in-noise intelligibility. Using a semantic oddball paradigm presented in the presence of background noise, this study aims to investigate how the provision of CI impacts speech-in-noise perception of SSD-CI users. METHOD: Task performance (reaction time, reaction time variability, target accuracy, subjective listening effort) and high density electroencephalography from twelve SSD-CI participants were recorded, while they completed a semantic acoustic oddball task. Reaction time was defined as the time taken for a participant to press the response button after stimulus onset. All participants completed the oddball task in three different free-field conditions with the speech and noise coming from different speakers. The three tasks were: (1) CI-On in background noise, (2) CI-Off in background noise, and (3) CI-On without background noise (Control). Task performance and electroencephalography data (N2N4 and P3b) were recorded for each condition. Speech in noise and sound localisation ability were also measured. RESULTS: Reaction time was significantly different between all tasks with CI-On (M [SE] = 809 [39.9] ms) having faster RTs than CI-Off (M [SE] = 845 [39.9] ms) and Control (M [SE] = 785 [39.9] ms) being the fastest condition. The Control condition exhibited significantly shorter N2N4 and P3b area latency compared to the other two conditions. However, despite these differences noticed in RTs and area latency, we observed similar results between all three conditions for N2N4 and P3b difference area. CONCLUSION: The inconsistency between the behavioural and neural results suggests that EEG may not be a reliable measure of cognitive effort. This rationale is further supported by different explanations used in past studies to explain N2N4 and P3b effects. Future studies should look to alternative measures of auditory processing (e.g., pupillometry) to gain a deeper understanding of the underlying auditory processes that facilitate speech-in-noise intelligibility.

A Study of Event-Related Potentials During Monaural and Bilateral Hearing in Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users.

OBJECTIVES: Single-sided deafness (SSD) is characterized by a profoundly deaf ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear. A cochlear implant (CI) is the only method to restore functional hearing in a profoundly deaf ear. In a previous study, we identified that the cortical processing of a CI signal differs from the normal-hearing ear (NHE) when directly compared using an auditory oddball paradigm consisting of pure tones. However, exactly how the brain integrates the electrical and acoustic signal is not well investigated. This study aims to understand how the provision of the CI in combination with the NHE may improve SSD CI users' ability to discriminate and evaluate auditory stimuli. DESIGN: Electroencephalography from 10 SSD-CI participants (4 participated in the previous pure-tone study) were recorded during a semantic acoustic oddball task, where they were required to discriminate between odd and even numbers. Stimuli were presented in four hearing conditions: directly through the CI, directly to the NHE, or in free field with the CI switched on and off. We examined task-performance (response time and accuracy) and measured N1, P2, N2N4, and P3b event-related brain potentials (ERPs) linked to the detection, discrimination, and evaluation of task relevant stimuli. Sound localization and speech in noise comprehension was also examined. RESULTS: In direct presentation, task performance was superior during NHE compared with CI (shorter and less varied reaction times [~720 versus ~842 msec], higher target accuracy [~93 versus ~70%]) and early neural responses (N1 and P2) were enhanced for NHE suggesting greater signal saliency. However, the size of N2N4 and P3b target-standard effects did not differ significantly between NHE and CI. In free field, target accuracy was similarly high with the CI (FF-On) and without the CI (FF-Off) (~95%), with some evidence of CI interference during FF-On (more variable and slightly but significantly delayed reaction times [~737 versus ~709 msec]). Early neural responses and late effects were also greater during FF-On. Performance on sound localization and speech in noise comprehension (S CI N NHE configuration only) was significantly greater during FF-On. CONCLUSIONS: Both behavioral and neural responses in the semantic oddball task were sensitive to CI in both direct and free-field presentations. Direct conditions revealed that participants could perform the task with the CI alone, although performance was suboptimal and early neural responses were reduced when compared with the NHE. For free-field, the addition of the CI was associated with enhanced early and late neural responses, but this did not result in improved task performance. Enhanced neural responses show that the additional input from the CI is modulating relevant perceptual and cognitive processes, but the benefit of binaural hearing on behavior may not be realized in simple oddball tasks which can be adequately performed with the NHE. Future studies interested in binaural hearing should examine performance under noisy conditions and/or use spatial cues to allow headroom for the measurement of binaural benefit.

Audiological practice and COVID-19: recommendations that audiological centers can use to maintain the safety and quality of service-expert opinion.

PURPOSE: Audiology is an essential service for some patient groups and some interventions. This article sets forth experience-based recommendations for how audiological centers can continue to safely and effectively function during COVID-19. METHODS: The recommendations are the result of panel discussion and are based on the clinical experience of the panelists/authors. RESULTS: The recommendations cover which patient groups and which interventions should be treated when and whether this can be performed in the clinic or remotely; how to maintain the safety of workplace via optimizing patient flow within the clinic and the sanitation of rooms and equipment; and overcoming communication challenges that COVID-19 intensifies. CONCLUSION: For essential audiological services to continue under COVID-19, safety measures must be implemented and maintained, and treatment and communication strategies must be adapted to offset communication difficulties due to personal protective equipment (PPE) and social distancing and to bolster patient confidence. In short, it is vital that staff feel safe, that patients either feel the clinic is safe enough to visit or that remote treatment may be an option, and that clinics and patients have a broad agreement on the urgency of any needed service. We hope that these recommendations help clinics effectively accomplish these goals.

Extended scope of practice audiology in the ENT outpatient clinic - a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility of using an extended scope (ES) audiology service to provide care to non-urgent adult patients waiting for an Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) appointment. DESIGN: Based on suitability criteria developed by the Audiology and ENT departments, an internal review of the ENT wait list identified patients who would be suitable for an ES audiology clinic. STUDY SAMPLE: 220 non-urgent patients on the ENT wait list with hearing loss and/or tinnitus. RESULTS: A total of 220 patients were transferred from the ENT wait list to the ES audiology clinic: 200 (90.9%) were seen by the ES Audiologist and 20 (9.1%) patients self-discharged or did not attend the appointment. Out of the 200 patients seen, 175 (87.5%) were assessed, managed and discharged without the need for input from an Otologist. The remaining 25 (12.5%) patients needed an Otologist's input. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated the feasibility of an ES audiology clinic in a tertiary teaching hospital. Of those seen by ES audiologist, 87.5% were discharged from the ENT wait list without medical intervention. This model may represent an effective alternative pathway for lengthy outpatient waiting list management whilst providing patients with timely access to care.

Comparative Analysis of Cortical Auditory Evoked Potential in Cochlear Implant Users.

OBJECTIVES: The primary goal of the study was to investigate electrical cortical auditory evoked potentials (eCAEPs) at maximum comfortable level (MCL) and 50% MCL on three cochlear implant (CI) electrodes and compare them with the acoustic CAEP (aCAEPs), in terms of the amplitude and latency of the P1-N1-P2 complex. This was achieved by comparing the eCAEP obtained with the method described and stimulating single electrodes, via the fitting software spanning the cochlear array and the aCAEP obtained using the HEARLab system at four speech tokens. DESIGN: Twenty MED-EL (MED-EL Medical Electronics, Innsbruck, Austria) CI adult users were tested. CAEP recording with HEARLab System was performed with speech tokens /m/, /g/, /t/, and /s/ in free field, presented at 55 dB SPL. eCAEPs were recorded with an Evoked Potential device triggered from the MAX Programming Interface (MED-EL Medical Devices) with 70 msec electrical burst at 0.9 Hz at the apical (1), middle (6), and basal (10 or 11) CI electrode at their MCL and 50% MCL. RESULTS: CAEP responses were recorded in 100% of the test subjects for the speech token /t/, 95% for the speech tokens /g/ and /s/, and 90% for the speech token /m/. For eCAEP recordings, in all subjects, it was possible to identify N1 and P2 peaks when stimulating the apical and middle electrodes. This incidence of detection decreased to an 85% chance of stimulation at 50% MCL on the same electrodes. A P1 peak was less evident for all electrodes. There was an overall increase in latency for stimulation at 50% MCL compared with MCL. There was a significant difference in the amplitude of adjacent peaks (P1-N1 and N1-P2) for 50% MCL compared with MCL. The mean of the maximum cross-correlation values were in the range of 0.63 to 0.68 for the four speech tokens. The distribution of the calculated time shift, where the maximum of the cross-correlation was found, was distributed between the speech tokens. The speech token /g/ had the highest number of valid cross-correlations, while the speech token /s/ had the lowest number. CONCLUSIONS: This study successfully compared aCAEP and eCAEP in CI users. Both acoustic and electrical P1-N1-P2 recordings obtained were clear and reliable, with good correlation. Latency increased with decreasing stimulation level, while amplitude decreased. eCAEP is potentially a better option to verify speech detection at the cortical level because it (1) uses direct stimulation and therefore creates less interference and delay of the sound processor and (2) creates more flexibility with the recording setup and stimulation setting. As such, eCAEP is an alternative method for CI optimization.

Cognitive Improvement After Cochlear Implantation in Older Adults With Severe or Profound Hearing Impairment: A Prospective, Longitudinal, Controlled, Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cognitive evolution of older adults with severe or profound hearing impairment after cochlear implantation with that of a matched group of older adults with severe hearing impairment who do not receive a cochlear implant (CI). DESIGN: In this prospective, longitudinal, controlled, and multicenter study, 24 older CI users were included in the intervention group and 24 adults without a CI in the control group. The control group matched the intervention group in terms of gender, age, formal education, cognitive functioning, and residual hearing. Assessments were made at baseline and 14 months later. Primary outcome measurements included the change in the total score on the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status for Hearing impaired individuals score and on its subdomain score to assess cognitive evolution in both groups. Secondary outcome measurements included self-reported changes in sound quality (Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index), self-perceived hearing disability (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale), states of anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and level of negative affectivity and social inhibition (Type D questionnaire). RESULTS: Improvements of the overall cognitive functioning (p = 0.05) and the subdomain "Attention" (p = 0.02) were observed after cochlear implantation in the intervention group; their scores were compared to the corresponding scores in the control group. Significant positive effects of cochlear implantation on sound quality and self-perceived hearing outcomes were found in the intervention group. Notably, 20% fewer traits of Type D personalities were measured in the intervention group after cochlear implantation. In the control group, traits of Type D personalities increased by 13%. CONCLUSION: Intervention with a CI improved cognitive functioning (domain Attention in particular) in older adults with severe hearing impairment compared to that of the matched controls with hearing impairment without a CI. However, older CI users did not, in terms of cognition, bridge the performance gap with adults with normal hearing after 1 year of CI use. The fact that experienced, older CI users still present subnormal cognitive functioning may highlight the need for additional cognitive rehabilitation in the long term after implantation.

Towards a Unified Testing Framework for Single-Sided Deafness Studies: A Consensus Paper.

BACKGROUND: While hearing aids for a contralateral routing of signals (CROS-HA) and bone conduction devices have been the traditional treatment for single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL), in recent years, cochlear implants (CIs) have increasingly become a viable treatment choice, particularly in countries where regulatory approval and reimbursement schemes are in place. Part of the reason for this shift is that the CI is the only device capable of restoring bilateral input to the auditory system and hence of possibly reinstating binaural hearing. Although several studies have independently shown that the CI is a safe and effective treatment for SSD and AHL, clinical outcome measures in those studies and across CI centers vary greatly. Only with a consistent use of defined and agreed-upon outcome measures across centers can high-level evidence be generated to assess the safety and efficacy of CIs and alternative treatments in recipients with SSD and AHL. METHODS: This paper presents a comparative study design and minimum outcome measures for the assessment of current treatment options in patients with SSD/AHL. The protocol was developed, discussed, and eventually agreed upon by expert panels that convened at the 2015 APSCI conference in Beijing, China, and at the CI 2016 conference in Toronto, Canada. RESULTS: A longitudinal study design comparing CROS-HA, BCD, and CI treatments is proposed. The recommended outcome measures include (1) speech in noise testing, using the same set of 3 spatial configurations to compare binaural benefits such as summation, squelch, and head shadow across devices; (2) localization testing, using stimuli that rove in both level and spectral content; (3) questionnaires to collect quality of life measures and the frequency of device use; and (4) questionnaires for assessing the impact of tinnitus before and after treatment, if applicable. CONCLUSION: A protocol for the assessment of treatment options and outcomes in recipients with SSD and AHL is presented. The proposed set of minimum outcome measures aims at harmonizing assessment methods across centers and thus at generating a growing body of high-level evidence for those treatment options.

Cochlear implantation improves localization ability in patients with unilateral deafness.

OBJECTIVES: One of the major complaints of people with a single-sided deafness is the inability to localize sound sources. Evidence suggests that subjects with a hearing loss can benefit from the use of a cochlear implant (CI) in sound localization. This study aimed to determine the effect of CI use on localization ability in unilaterally deafened subjects. DESIGN: Sixteen adult subjects with postlingual unilateral deafness, fitted with a CI on the deaf side, were included in this study. The auditory speech sounds evaluation (A§E) localization test was used to determine localization with a CI on (binaural) and a CI off (monaural). The root mean square error was used as a measure of the subject's localization performance. Stratified analyses were performed to test the influence of gender, age of implantation (<55 years and >55 years), and the duration of deafness (<10 years and >10 years) on localization ability. RESULTS: Subjects with a CI on localized significantly better than without a CI. Gender, age, and the duration of deafness had no effect on the localization ability of the subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implantation is effective in improving localization abilities in subjects with unilateral deafness. The root mean square error dropped significantly with binaural hearing compared to monaural hearing.

Cochlear implant programming: a global survey on the state of the art.

The programming of CIs is essential for good performance. However, no Good Clinical Practice guidelines exist. This paper reports on the results of an inventory of the current practice worldwide. A questionnaire was distributed to 47 CI centers. They follow 47600 recipients in 17 countries and 5 continents. The results were discussed during a debate. Sixty-two percent of the results were verified through individual interviews during the following months. Most centers (72%) participated in a cross-sectional study logging 5 consecutive fitting sessions in 5 different recipients. Data indicate that general practice starts with a single switch-on session, followed by three monthly sessions, three quarterly sessions, and then annual sessions, all containing one hour of programming and testing. The main focus lies on setting maximum and, to a lesser extent, minimum current levels per electrode. These levels are often determined on a few electrodes and then extrapolated. They are mainly based on subjective loudness perception by the CI user and, to a lesser extent, on pure tone and speech audiometry. Objective measures play a small role as indication of the global MAP profile. Other MAP parameters are rarely modified. Measurable targets are only defined for pure tone audiometry. Huge variation exists between centers on all aspects of the fitting practice.

Paediatric post-grommets surgery review: Audiology-led clinic.

BACKGROUND: Otitis media (OM) has a high prevalence in childhood, and grommet insertion is the most common surgical treatment for OM. The public health system in Australia faces considerable strains, including high demand for Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) specialists. Extending the scope of practice for audiologists to manage post-operative care for children receiving grommets has the potential to alleviate this burden. METHODS: This non-randomised, cross-sectional study investigated the efficacy and feasibility of an audiology-led clinic for managing paediatric patients after grommet insertion at a tertiary teaching hospital in Western Australia. Senior audiologists reviewed children at 6 weeks and 10 months post-operatively, escalating care to an ENT specialist if abnormalities were observed. Children with normal hearing and patent grommets were reviewed and discharged by the audiologist. RESULTS: A total of 93 children were included (mean age 5.18 ± 2.25 years, range 1.59-11.46 years). At the 6-week review, 72/93 (77 %) presented with in-situ grommets and normal hearing, while 21/93 (22 %) were escalated for immediate ENT care. At the 10-month review, 54/72 (75 %) were discharged without further ENT intervention, and 18/72 (25 %) required additional ENT investigation. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that an audiology-led follow-up clinic for post-grommet insertion is a viable option, providing efficient, high-quality care. Two-thirds of paediatric patients did not require ENT input or review post-operatively. The results support interdisciplinary models of care, which could help address challenges faced by overburdened ENT services.

Decision making in bone conduction and active middle ear implants - hearing outcomes and experiences over a 10-year period.

OBJECTIVES: To review the decision-making paradigm in the recommendations of BCI and aMEI overlapping candidacy for patients with conductive or mixed HL, and to determine if there are differences in hearing and quality of life outcomes between these implantable hearing devices. METHODS: Retrospective data from patients receiving BCI or aMEI in the past decade were analysed. Patients were grouped into: 1. BCI candidates, 2. BCI or aMEI candidates, and 3. aMEI candidates. We compared outcomes and examined the impact of BC threshold, age at implantation, and duration of hearing loss on candidacy. RESULTS: 89 participants were included: 30 BCI, 37 aMEI, and 22 BCI or aMEI candidates. All groups performed similarly in aided sound field threshold testing. BCI group had lower speech scores in quiet compared to 'BCI or aMEI.' No significant differences were found in APHAB global scores. BC threshold, duration of hearing loss, and age at implantation had no significant effects. DISCUSSION: Outcomes were generally similar across groups, except for higher effective gain in the aMEI group. CONCLUSION: Our proposed patient pathway and decision-making approach facilitate candidate selection for aMEI and BCI, aiming to optimise outcomes.

Results of a Novel, Nonsurgical Bone-Conduction Hearing Aid for the Treatment of Conductive Hearing Loss in Australian Children.

OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare the benefits a novel adhesive bone-conduction system and a conventional bone-conduction hearing aid (BCHA) on a softband for children with conductive hearing loss. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-subject randomized, crossover trial. SETTING: Tertiary referral center in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Eight children aged from 4 to 17 years with conductive hearing loss. INTERVENTION: Rehabilitative with participants using the novel adhesive bone-conduction aid and a BCHA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Aided thresholds, as well as speech perception in quiet, unaided and aided with the novel adhesive bone-conduction aid and BCHA on a softband. For the six older children, speech in noise testing was also conducted. RESULTS: The mean unaided four frequency average hearing levels was 48 dB HL for air conduction, 10.5 dB HL for bone conduction, with a mean air-bone gap in the aided ear of 37.5 dB HL.Four-frequency average hearing level aided thresholds were 20.2 dB for the novel device and 19.8 dB for the BCHA, with no significant difference between the devices. Aided monosyllabic word scores improved from an average of 45% in the unaided condition to 81.6 and 85% for the novel adhesive and BCHA devices, respectively. Aided speech in noise performance improved, on average, by 1.6 dB SNR when wearing the BCHA and the novel adhesive device, with no significant difference in performance between the two devices. CONCLUSIONS: The novel device provided equivalent performance to the BCHA on all measures and can be considered as an alternative device for pediatric patients with conductive hearing loss.

Evaluation of the Performance of OTOPLAN-Based Cochlear Implant Electrode Array Selection: A Retrospective Study.

Otoplan is a surgical planning software designed to assist with cochlear implant surgery. One of its outputs is a recommendation of electrode array type based on imaging parameters. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the differences in auditory outcomes between patients who were implanted with arrays corresponding to those recommended by the Otoplan software versus those in which the array selection differed from the Otoplan recommendation. Pre-operative CT images from 114 patients were imported into the software, and array recommendations were generated. These were compared to the arrays which had actually been implanted during surgery, both in terms of array type and length. As recommended, 47% of patients received the same array, 34% received a shorter array, and 18% received a longer array. For reasons relating to structure and hearing preservation, 83% received the more flexible arrays. Those who received stiffer arrays had cochlear malformations or ossification. A negative, although non-statistically significant correlation was observed between the CNC scores at 12 months and the absolute value of the difference between recommended array and implanted array. In conclusion, clinicians may be slightly biased toward shorter electrode arrays due to their perceived greater ability to achieve full insertion. Using 3D imaging during the pre-operative planning may improve clinicians' confidence to implant longer electrode arrays, where appropriate, to achieve optimum hearing outcomes.