Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life in Adults with Unilateral Hearing Loss

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 259-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret T. Dillon ◽  
Emily Buss ◽  
Meredith A. Rooth ◽  
English R. King ◽  
Ellen J. Deres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Behavioral Measures ◽  
Speech Perception In Noise ◽  
Contralateral Ear

Objective: Patients with moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in 1 ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear, known as unilateral hearing loss (UHL) or single-sided deafness (SSD), may experience improved quality of life with the use of a cochlear implant (CI) in the affected ear. Quality of life assessment before and after implantation may reveal changes to aspects of hearing beyond those explicitly evaluated with behavioral measures. Methods: The present report completed 2 experiments investigating quality of life outcomes in CI recipients with UHL. The first experiment assessed quality of life during the 1st year of device use with 3 questionnaires: the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), and the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory. Twenty subjects were evaluated preoperatively and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-activation. Quality of life results were compared over the study period using traditional scoring methods and the SSQ pragmatic subscales. Subscales specific to localization and speech perception in noise were compared to behavioral measures at the preoperative and 12-month intervals. The 2nd experiment evaluated quality of life preoperatively and at the 12-month interval for CI recipients with UHL and CI recipients with bilateral hearing loss, including conventional CI users and those listening with electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS). The 3 cohorts differed in CI candidacy criteria, including the amount of residual hearing in the contralateral ear. Results: For subjects with moderate-to-profound UHL, receipt of a CI significantly improved quality of life, with benefits noted as early as 1 month after initial activation. The UHL cohort reported less perceived difficulty at the pre- and postoperative intervals than the conventional CI and EAS cohorts, which may be due to the presence of the normal-hearing ear. Each group experienced a significant benefit in quality of life on the APHAB with CI use. Conclusions: Cochlear implantation in cases of substantial UHL may offer significant improvements in quality of life. Quality of life measures revealed a reduction in perceived tinnitus severity and subjective improvements in speech perception in noise, spatial hearing, and listening effort. While self-report of difficulties were lower for the UHL cohort than the conventional CI and EAS cohorts, subjects in all 3 groups reported an improvement in quality of life with CI use.

Quality of life of children treated for unilateral hearing loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. archdischild-2020-320389
Author(s):  
Sarah Nicolas ◽  
Yohan Gallois ◽  
Marie-Noëlle Calmels ◽  
Olivier Deguine ◽  
Bernard Fraysse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Design Selection

ObjectiveTo evaluate the treatments’ consequences for unilateral hearing loss in children.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42018109417). The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ISRCTN and ClinicalTrials databases were searched between September 2018 and May 2019. Articles were screened and data were collected independently by two authors following the Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane tool, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the National Institute of Health, USA tool and considering the risk of confounding. In the studies with the lowest risk of bias, a meta-analysis was conducted.InterventionsValidated hearing rehabilitation devices.Patients6–15 years old children with moderate to profound unilateral hearing loss.Main outcome measuresThe primary study outcome was children’s quality of life. Academic performances were studied as an additional outcome.Results731 unique articles were identified from the primary search. Of these, 18 articles met the Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes and Study design selection criteria. In the eight studies with the lowest risk of bias, two meta-analysis were conducted. There was not enough data on academic results to conduct a meta-analysis. In 73 children included in a fixed effect meta-analysis (two studies), no effect of treatment could be shown (g=−0.20, p=0.39). In 61 children included in a random-effect meta-analysis (six studies), a strong positive effect of hearing treatment on quality of life was demonstrated (g=1.32, p<0.05).ConclusionsThe treatment of unilateral hearing loss seems to improve children’s quality of life. Further research is needed to identify the most effective treatment and its corresponding indications.

scholarly journals Quality of Life in Children with Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2019 ◽  
Vol 162 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evette A. Ronner ◽  
Liliya Benchetrit ◽  
Patricia Levesque ◽  
Razan A. Basonbul ◽  
Michael S. Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Pedsql 4.0 ◽  
Hearing Device ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

Objective To assess quality of life (QOL) in pediatric patients with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) with the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 (PedsQL 4.0) and the Hearing Environments and Reflection on Quality of Life 26 (HEAR-QL-26) and HEAR-QL-28 surveys. Study Design Prospective longitudinal study. Setting Tertiary care center. Subjects and Methods Surveys were administered to patients with SNHL (ages 2-18 years) from July 2016 to December 2018 at a multidisciplinary hearing loss clinic. Patients aged >7 years completed the HEAR-QL-26, HEAR-QL-28, and PedsQL 4.0 self-report tool, while parents completed the PedsQL 4.0 parent proxy report for children aged ≤7 years. Previously published data from children with normal hearing were used for controls. The independent t test was used for analysis. Results In our cohort of 100 patients, the mean age was 7.7 years (SD, 4.5): 62 participants had bilateral SNHL; 63 had mild to moderate SNHL; and 37 had severe to profound SNHL. Sixty-eight patients used a hearing device. Mean (SD) total survey scores for the PedsQL 4.0 (ages 2-7 and 8-18 years), HEAR-QL-26 (ages 7-12 years), and HEAR-QL-28 (ages 13-18 years) were 83.9 (14.0), 79.2 (11.1), 81.2 (9.8), and 77.5 (11.3), respectively. Mean QOL scores for patients with SNHL were significantly lower than those for controls on the basis of previously published normative data ( P < .0001). There was no significant difference in QOL between children with unilateral and bilateral SNHL or between children with SNHL who did and did not require a hearing device. Low statistical power due to small subgroup sizes limited our analysis. Conclusion It is feasible to collect QOL data from children with SNHL in a hearing loss clinic. Children with SNHL had significantly lower scores on validated QOL instruments when compared with peers with normal hearing.

scholarly journals COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION PREVALENCE IN ELDERLY

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-128
Author(s):  
A. V. Starokha ◽  
A. V. Balakina ◽  
M. M. Litvak ◽  
A. E. Knipenberg ◽  
N. V. Shcherbik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Weighted Sums ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Role Functioning ◽  
Sf 36

Current paper describes an experience of cochlear implantation in elderly. Cochlear implantation has become a widely accepted intervention in the treatment of individuals with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. Cochlear implants are now accepted as a standard of care to optimize hearing and subsequent speech development in children and adults with deafness. But cochlear implantation affects not only hearing abilities, speech perception and speech production; it also has an outstanding impact on the social life, activities and self-esteem of each patient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cochlear implantation efficacy in elderly with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. There were 5 patients under our observation. Surgery was performed according to traditional posterior tympanotomy and cochleostomy for cochlear implant electrode insertion for all observed patients. The study was conducted in two stages: before speech processor’s activation and 3 months later. Pure tone free field audiometry was performed to each patient to assess the efficiency of cochlear implantation in dynamics. The aim of the study was also to evaluate quality of life in elderly with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss after unilateral cochlear implantation. Each patient underwent questioning with 36 Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). SF-36 is a set of generic, coherent, and easily administered quality-of-life measures. The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The eight sections are: physical functioning; physical role functioning; emotional role functioning; vitality; emotional well-being; social role functioning; bodily pain; general health perceptions. Our results demonstrate that cochlear implantation in elderly consistently improved quality of life and enhance the efficiency of audiologic rehabilitation.

Performance and QOL after Geriatric Cochlear Implantation

2008 ◽  
Vol 139 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. P57-P58
Author(s):  
Alexandros Georgolios ◽  
Kelley Melissa Dodson ◽  
Cristina Baldassari ◽  
Patrick G Maiberger ◽  
Aristides Sismanis
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Comorbid Conditions ◽  
Glasgow Benefit Inventory

Objective To assess audiologic performance and quality of life in geriatric cochlear implantation patients and to determine whether comorbid medical conditions, etiology, and duration of hearing loss impact audiologic and quality of life outcomes. Methods Geriatric patients who underwent cochlear implantation between 1990 and 2006 were evaluated. Inclusion criteria were 55 years of age or older at time of implantation and post-lingual hearing loss. Patients with primary language other than English were excluded. 49 cochlear implant recipients were identified. A group of younger implanted patients was used as a control. All patients completed standardized audiologic tests including the Hearing In Noise Test. Validated surveys, including the Glasgow Benefit Inventory and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly, were used to assess quality of life. Results The mean age at implantation was 69.5 (range 58–85) and the average time interval from the implantation to the completion of the surveys was 73.2 months (6 to 229). Identified comorbid conditions included hypertension, diabetes, and malignancies, among others. Audiologic performance and quality of life scores between the two groups were similar. In the geriatric group there was no difference in patient satisfaction between subgroups with 0–1, 2–3 or > 3 comorbid conditions. Conclusions Our results suggest that the audiologic performance and quality of life scores between the older and younger age groups are similar. In the geriatric group associated comorbidities did not interfere with patient satisfaction as assessed by survey instruments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document