Cost-utility analysis of bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a health economic assessment from the perspective of a publicly funded program

Chronic otitis media

Chronic otitis media, defined as persistent or recurrent inflammation of the middle ear mucosa, is a frequent entity in primary and secondary care. This disease causes otorrhea and hearing loss that significantly affect the quality of life of patients. In recent years, there have been new developments in its diagnosis, prevention and treatment. In this last aspect, pharmacological treatment, surgical techniques and hearing rehabilitation through implants have shown significant advances. On the other hand, chronic otitis media complications continue to occur in emergency services and have to be kept in mind because of their potential seriousness. The objective of this work is to offer the reader an update in chronic otitis media, so it may help improving the care of affected patients.

Derivation and Initial Validation of the Utility Function for the Hearing Utility Measure (HUM)

OBJECTIVE

The Hearing Utility Measure (HUM) is a replacement hearing attribute for the Health Utilities Index, Mark 3 (HUI-3) designed to improve the responsiveness of utility estimates to changes in hearing-related quality of life. The final development step is to derive the instrument's utility scoring function.

METHODS

Residents of Ontario, Canada, aged ≥18 years participated in standard gamble and visual analogue scale exercises. Valuations for levels (response options) within each domain, and for each domain relative to the other domains were elicited and used to generate a hearing utility function. The function outputs hearing utility ranging from 0 = 'unable to hear at all' to 1 = 'perfect hearing' for each of the 25,920 hearing states classifiable by the HUM. Performance was assessed relative to the criterion standard: directly elicited standard gamble utility. Distributions of HUM-derived hearing utility were compared with legacy HUI-3 derived estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 126 respondents participated (mean age 39.2, range 18-85 years, 53% female [67/126]). The utility function performed well in the estimation of directly elicited utilities (mean difference 0.03, RMSE 0.06). Using the legacy HUI-3, estimated hearing utility was 1.0 for 118/126 respondents (93.6%) compared with just 66/126 (52.4%) using the HUM.

CONCLUSION

The new hearing attribute is capable of measuring variations in hearing utility not captured by the legacy HUI-3, especially near the ceiling of hearing function. These findings justify its application and further work to study its measurement properties in hearing loss populations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 134:4754-4762, 2024.

The cost evaluation of day-case compared to inpatient cochlear implantation in adults: subanalysis of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the assumption that day-case cochlear implantation is associated with lower costs, compared to inpatient cochlear implantation, while maintaining equal quality of life (QoL) and hearing outcomes, for the Dutch healthcare setting.

STUDY DESIGN

A single-center, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

Thirty adult patients with post-lingual bilateral sensorineural hearing loss eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation surgery were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group (i.e., one night admission). We performed an intention-to-treat evaluation of the difference of the total health care-related costs, hospital and out of hospital costs, between day-case and inpatient cochlear implantation, from a hospital and patient perspective over the course of one year. Audiometric outcomes, assessed using CVC scores, and QoL, assessed using the EQ-5D and HUI3 questionnaires, were taken into account.

RESULTS

There were two drop-outs. The total health care-related costs were €41,828 in the inpatient group (n = 14) and €42,710 in the day-case group (n = 14). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.2 days (mean costs of €1,069) in the inpatient group and 0.7 days (mean costs of €701) for the day-case group. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital and out of hospital costs. The QoL at 2 months and 1 year postoperative, measured by the EQ-5D index value and HUI3 showed no statistically significant difference. The EQ-5D VAS score measured at 1 year postoperatively was statistically significantly higher in the inpatient group (84/100) than in the day-case group (65/100). There were no differences in postoperative complications, objective hearing outcomes, and number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits.

CONCLUSION

A day-case approach to cochlear implant surgery does not result in a statistically significant reduction of health care-related costs compared to an inpatient approach and does not affect the surgical outcome (complications and objective hearing measurements), QoL, and postoperative course (number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1

Economic Analysis of Cochlear Implants in Adults With Bilateral Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss. A Systematic Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness or cost-utility of cochlear implants (CI) in adults with severe to profound bilateral hearing loss.

DATABASES REVIEWED

PubMed (Medline), The Cochrane Library, Embase via Elsevier, EBSCOhost CINAHL, and Scopus.

METHODS

The study included adult participants with severe to profound bilateral neurosensory hearing loss. The analysis encompassed quality of life improvements, costs, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit, quality-adjusted life year (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR). Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case series, and prospective or retrospective cohort studies published in English between 2010 and 2023 were retrieved. Exclusion criteria included incomplete studies, abstracts, clinical cases, editorials, letters, studies involving pediatric populations, single-side deafness, methodology research, noneconomic aspects of CI, mixed child and adult data, and studies published before 2010. The risk of bias was assessed following the criteria outlined in Appendix I of the economic evaluation's quality assessment as per the NICE Guideline Development Method.

RESULTS

Ten articles met the criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. One study conducted a prospective cost-utility analyses, one carried out a cost-benefit analyses, one was a randomized controlled clinical trial focusing on cost-utility, and another was a clinical trial addressing cost-effectiveness. Six studies employed Markov models, and one study utilized uniquely the Monte Carlo method. None quantified the economic impact of improved hearing on cognitive function.

CONCLUSIONS

The heterogeneity of sources impacted data quality. Unilateral and sequential bilateral CI appeared to be cost-effective when compared with bilateral hearing aids or nontechnological support. When properly indicated, simultaneous bilateral CIs are cost-effective compared to no interventions and to unilateral cochlear implantation through differential discounting or variations from the base cases, especially with a life expectancy of 5-10 years or longer.

Impact of Expanding Eligibility Criteria for Cochlear Implantation - Dynamic Modeling Study

OBJECTIVES

Eligibility criteria for cochlear implantation (CI) are shifting due to technological and surgical improvements. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of further expanding unilateral CI criteria in those with severe hearing loss (HL) (61-80 dBHL) in terms of number of CI recipients, costs, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

A dynamic population-based Markov model was constructed mimicking the Dutch population in three age categories over a period of 20 years. Health states included severe HL (61-80 dBHL), profound HL (>81 dBHL), CI recipients, and no-CI recipients. Model parameters were based on published literature, (national) databases, expert opinion, and model calibration.

RESULTS

If persons with severe HL would qualify and opt for CI similar to those with profound HL now, this would lead to a 6-7 times increase of new CI recipients and an associated increase in costs (€550 million) and QALYs (54.000) over a 20-year period (incremental cost utility ratio: 10.771 euros/QALY [2.5-97.5 percentiles: 1.252-23.171]). One-way-sensitivity analysis indicated that model outcomes were most sensitive to regaining employment, utility associated with having a CI, and costs of surgery and testing.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that expanding eligibility for CI to persons with severe HL could be a cost-effective use of resources. Clearly, however, it would require a significant increase in diagnostic, operative, and rehabilitative capacity. Our quantitative estimates can serve as a basis for a wider societal deliberation on the question whether such an increase can and should be pursued.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 133:924-932, 2023.

Presbycusis and balance disorders in the elderly. Bibliographical review of ethiopathogenic aspects, consequences on quality of life and positive effects of its treatment

At this time, we still do not have adequate knowledge and awareness of the consequences of hearing loss in the elderly on quality of life. Similarly, there is also insufficient information on the relationship of presbycusis and balance disorders with other comorbidities. Such knowledge can contribute to improve both prevention and treatment of these pathologies, to reduce their impact on other areas such as cognition or autonomy, as well as to have more accurate information on the economic impact they generate in society and in the health system. Therefore, with this review article we aim to update the information on the type of hearing loss and balance disorders in people over 55 years of age, and their associated factors; to analyze the impact on the quality of life of these people and the one which can be generated at a personal and population level (both sociological and economic) if an early intervention in these patients is pursued.

Health State Utility Values Associated with Cochlear Implants in Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The cost-effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants in adults remains uncertain despite established clinical benefits. In cost-effectiveness studies, benefit is often measured by change in health state utility value (HSUV), a single number summary of health-related quality of life anchored at 0 (state of being dead) and 1 (perfect health). Small differences in bilateral cochlear implant HSUV change conclusions of published models, and invalid estimates can therefore mislead policy and funding decisions. As such, we aimed to review and synthesize published HSUV estimates associated with cochlear implants.

DESIGN

We included observational or experimental studies reporting HSUV for adult patients (age ≥18 years) with at least moderate-profound sensorineural hearing loss in both ears who received unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases up to May 1, 2021. Study and participant characteristics and HSUV outcomes were extracted. Narrative synthesis is reported for all studies. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to generate pooled estimates for the mean difference in HSUV for three comparisons: (1) unilateral cochlear implant versus preimplant, (2) bilateral cochlear implants versus preimplant, (3) bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implants. Our principal measure was pooled mean difference in HSUV.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies reporting unique patient cohorts were identified. Health Utilities Index, 3 (HUI-3) was the most common HSUV elicitation method. HSUV from 19 preimplant mean estimates (1402 patients), 19 unilateral cochlear implant mean estimates (1701 patients), and 5 bilateral cochlear implants mean estimates (83 patients) were pooled to estimate mean differences in HUI-3 HSUV by network meta-analysis. Compared with preimplant, a unilateral cochlear implant was associated with a mean change in HSUV of +0.17 (95% credible interval [CrI] +0.12 to +0.23) and bilateral cochlear implants were associated with a mean change of +0.25 (95% CrI +0.12 to +0.37). No significant difference in HSUV was detected for bilateral compared with unilateral cochlear implants (+0.08 [95% CrI -0.06 to +0.21]). Overall study quality was moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review and network meta-analysis comprise the best-available resource for parameterization of cost-utility models of cochlear implantation in adults and highlight the need to critically evaluate the validity of available HSUV instruments for bilateral cochlear implant populations.Protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42018091838).

The Impact of Hearing Loss and Its Treatment on Health-Related Quality of Life Utility: a Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss significantly impacts health-related quality of life (QoL), yet the effects of current treatments on QoL utility remain uncertain. Our objective was to describe the impact of untreated and treated hearing loss on QoL utility to inform hearing healthcare policy.

METHODS

We searched databases for articles published through 02/01/2021. Two independent reviewers screened for articles that reported elicitation of general QoL utility values for untreated and treated hearing loss health states. We extracted data and quality indicators from 62 studies that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Included studies predominately used observational pre/post designs (61%), evaluated unilateral cochlear implantation (65%), administered the Health Utilities Index 3 (HUI3; 71%), and were conducted in Europe and North America (84%). In general, treatment of hearing loss improved post-treatment QoL utility when measured by most methods except the Euro-QoL 5 dimension (EQ-5D). In meta-analysis, hearing aids for adult mild-to-moderate hearing loss compared to no treatment significantly improved HUI3-estimated QoL utility (3 studies; mean change=0.11; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07 to 0.14) but did not impact EQ-5D-estimated QoL (3 studies; mean change=0.0; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.04). Cochlear implants improved adult QoL utility 1-year post-implantation when measured by the HUI3 (7 studies; mean change=0.17; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.23); however, pediatric VAS-estimated QoL utility was non-significant (4 studies; mean change=0.12; 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.25). The quality of included studies was limited by failure to report missingness of data and low survey response rates. Our study was limited by heterogeneous study populations and designs.

FINDINGS

Treatment of hearing loss significantly improves QoL utility, and the HUI3 and VAS were most sensitive to improvements in hearing. Improved access to hearing healthcare should be prioritized. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42021253314.

Cost-utility Analysis of Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Single-sided Deafness: Austrian and German Perspective

BACKGROUND

Single-sided deafness (SSD) is associated with a loss of binaural hearing. Major limitations of such patients are poor speech understanding in noisy environments and a lack of spatial hearing. To date, cochlear implantation is the most promising approach to overcome these deficits in this group of patients.

OBJECTIVE

Cost-effectiveness analyses of cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness. The model targets Austrian and German SSD patients who can either opt for treatment with a cochlear implant (CI) or decide against a CI and stay without any treatment.

METHODS

A Markov model analyzed as microsimulation was developed using TreeAge Pro 2019 software. Pre- and postoperative utility values generated with HUI-3 were used to populate the model. Costs covered by the national insurance were considered. Costs and utilities were discounted by 3%. A model time horizon of 20 years was set.

RESULTS

According to Austrian base-case analysis, the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was €34845.2 per quality-adjusted life year gained when comparing the "CI strategy" to the "no treatment strategy." The ICUR is marginally lower when adapting a German cost perspective-it was €31601.25 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Sensitivity analyses showed that the cost-effectiveness results are stable. Analyses also showed that the longer the time horizon is set, the more favorable the cost-effectiveness result is.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on currently available data, the Markov microsimulation model suggests that cochlear implantation is cost-effective in Austrian and German patients with SSD if no other treatment option is considered within the model.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Poland

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to develop a Markov model and apply it for the evaluation of three different treatment scenarios for adult patients with severe to profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective Observational Study.

SETTINGS

Hospital.

PATIENTS

A clinical group of 22 adult patients (59.1% men, 40.9% women) aged from 59.13 ± 8.9 years were included in the study. The study comprised two arms: patients in group 1 received the second cochlear implant one to three months after the first implant; while patients in group 2 got the second cochlear implant approximately one year after the first implant.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All participants were first asked to complete an AQoL-8D questionnaire. For the cost-effectiveness analyses, a Markov model analyzed as microsimulation was developed to compare the different treatment options.

RESULTS

The analyses show that bilateral cochlear implantation strategies are cost-effective compared to the 'no treatment' alternative when having a 10-year model time horizon. When all three model scenarios are compared, the bilateral simultaneous cochlear implantation strategy (Scenario 3) compared to the 'no treatment' option is even more cost-effective than the Scenarios 1 and 2, compared with the 'no treatment' alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

The model results summarize that bilateral (sequential and simultaneous) cochlear implantation that are represented in the model scenarios, are cost-effective strategies for Polish adult patients with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss.

Evidence gaps in economic analyses of hearing healthcare: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss is a common and costly medical condition. This systematic review sought to identify evidence gaps in published model-based economic analyses addressing hearing loss to inform model development for an ongoing Lancet Commission.

METHODS

We searched the published literature through 14 June 2020 and our inclusion criteria included decision model-based cost-effectiveness analyses that addressed diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of hearing loss. Two investigators screened articles for inclusion at the title, abstract, and full-text levels. Data were abstracted and the studies were assessed for the qualities of model structure, data assumptions, and reporting using a previously published quality scale.

FINDINGS

Of 1437 articles identified by our search, 117 unique studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of these model-based analyses were set in high-income countries (n = 96, 82%). The evaluated interventions were hearing screening (n = 35, 30%), cochlear implantation (n = 34, 29%), hearing aid use (n = 28, 24%), vaccination (n = 22, 19%), and other interventions (n = 29, 25%); some studies included multiple interventions. Eighty-six studies reported the main outcome in quality-adjusted or disability-adjusted life-years, 24 of which derived their own utility values. The majority of the studies used decision tree (n = 72, 62%) or Markov (n = 41, 35%) models. Forty-one studies (35%) incorporated indirect economic effects. The median quality rating was 92/100 (IQR:72-100).

INTERPRETATION

The review identified a large body of literature exploring the economic efficiency of hearing healthcare interventions. However, gaps in evidence remain in evaluation of hearing healthcare in low- and middle-income countries, as well as in investigating interventions across the lifespan. Additionally, considerable uncertainty remains around productivity benefits of hearing healthcare interventions as well as utility values for hearing-assisted health states. Future economic evaluations could address these limitations.

FUNDING

NCATS 3UL1-TR002553-03S3.

Determining treatment choices after the cochlear implant evaluation process

OBJECTIVES

Determine the proportion of patients starting the cochlear implant evaluation (CIE) process proceeding to cochlear implantation.Determine which patient factors are associated with undergoing cochlear implantation.

METHODS

Retrospective case series of all patients scheduled for a CIE within a tertiary academic neurotology practice between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2016. Management pathways of patients undergoing CIE were examined.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-seven adult patients were scheduled for CIE during the study period. Two hundred twenty-six patients started the evaluation process, and 203 patients completed full evaluation. Of patients that completed CIE, 166/203 (82%) met criteria for implantation and 37/203 (18%) did not meet criteria. Fifty-nine patients out of 166 patients (36%) meeting criteria did not receive implants and 107/166 (64%) underwent implantation, yielding an overall implantation rate of 47% (107/226) among patients scheduled for CIE. Common reasons for deferring CI among candidates included failure to show up for preoperative appointment (24%), choosing hearing aids as an alternative (22%), patient refusal (21%) and insurance issues (17%). Overall, CIE led to a new adjunctive hearing device (CI or hearing aid) in 113 (113/203, 56%) cases.

CONCLUSION

Fifty-six (113/203) percent of patients who underwent CIE at an academic medical center underwent CI surgery or received an adjunctive hearing device, but 36% (59/166) of candidates did not receive a CI. Patients who forewent CI despite meeting candidacy criteria did so due to cost/insurance issues, or due to preference for auditory amplification rather than CI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Cost-benefit Analysis of Cochlear Implants: A Societal Perspective

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Objectives:

While the costs and outcomes of cochlear implantation (CI) have been widely assessed, most of these analyses were solely performed from the perspective of healthcare costs. This study assesses the costs and benefits of CI in the Netherlands from a broader societal perspective, including health outcomes, healthcare cost, educational cost, and productivity losses and gains.

Design:

The cost and benefits of CI were analyzed in this cost-benefit analysis, in which a monetary value is put on both the resources needed and the outcomes of CI. The costs and benefits were analyzed by prototypical instances of three groups, representing the majority of cochlear implant patients: prelingually deaf children implanted at the age of 1, adults with progressive profound hearing loss implanted at the age of 40 and seniors implanted at the age of 70 with progressive profound hearing loss. Costs and benefits were estimated over the expected lifetimes of the members of each group, using a Markov state transition model. Model parameters and assumptions were based on published literature. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results:

In all three patient groups, the total benefits of CI exceeded the total cost, leading to a net benefit of CI. Prelingually deaf children with a bilateral CI had a lifetime positive outcome net benefit of €433,000. Adults and seniors with progressive profound hearing loss and a unilateral CI had a total net benefit of €275,000 and €76,000, respectively. These results ensue from health outcomes expressed in monetary terms, reduced educational cost, and increased productivity.

Conclusions:

Based on estimates from modeling, the increased healthcare costs due to CI were more than compensated by the value of the health benefits and by savings in educational and productivity costs. In particular, for children and working adults, the societal benefit was positive even without taking health benefits into account. Therefore, CI generates an advantage for both patients and society.

Health-Related Quality of Life Changes Associated With Hearing Loss

Importance

Utility is a single-value, preference-based measure of health-related quality of life that represents the desirability of a health state relative to being dead or in perfect health. Clinical, funding, and policy decisions rely on measured changes in utility. The benefit of hearing loss treatments may be underestimated because existing utility measures fail to capture important changes in quality of life associated with hearing loss.

Objective

To develop a comprehensive profile of items that describe how quality of life is associated with hearing loss and its treatments that can be used to generate hearing-related quality of life measures, including a novel utility measure.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This qualitative study, performed from August 1, 2018, to August 1, 2019, in tertiary referral centers, comprised a systematic literature review, focus groups, and semistructured interviews. The systematic review evaluated studies published from 1982 to August 1, 2018. Focus groups included 8 clinical experts experienced in the measurement, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of hearing loss. Semistructured interviews included 26 adults with hearing loss recruited from an institutional data set and outpatient hearing aid and otology clinics using stratified convenience sampling to include individuals of diverse ages, urban and rural residency, causes of hearing loss, severity of hearing loss, and treatment experience.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A set of items and subdomains that collectively describe the association of hearing loss with health-related quality of life.

Results

The literature search yielded 2779 articles from the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases. Forty-five studies including 1036 individuals (age range, 18-84 years) were included. The focus group included 4 audiologists and 4 otologists. Hour-long semistructured interviews were conducted with 26 individuals (13 women; median age, 54 years; range, 25-83 years) with a broad range of hearing loss causes, configurations, and severities. From all 3 sources, a total of 125 items were generated and organized into 29 subdomains derived from the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health.

Conclusions and Relevance

The association of hearing loss with quality of life is multidimensional and includes subdomains that are not considered in the estimation of health utility by existing utility measures. The presented comprehensive profile of items can be used to generate or evaluate measures of hearing-related quality of life, including utility measures.

Bilateral cochlear implantation

Binaural hearing has certain benefits while listening in noisy environments. It provides the listeners with access to time, level and spectral differences between sound signals, perceived by the two ears. However, single sided deaf (SSD) or unilateral cochlear implant (CI) users cannot experience these binaural benefits due to the acoustic input coming from a single ear. The translational research on bilateral CIs started in the year 1998, initiated by J. Müller and J. Helms from Würzburg, Germany in association with MED-EL. Since then, several clinical studies were conducted by different research groups from across the world either independently or in collaboration with MED-EL. As a result, the bilateral CI has become the standard of care in many countries along with reimbursement by the health care systems. Recent data shows that children particularly, are given high priority for the bilateral CI implantation, most often performed simultaneously in a single surgery, as the binaural hearing has a positive effect on their language development. This article covers the milestones of translational research from the first concept to the widespread clinical use of bilateral CI.

Cost-effectiveness of Pediatric Unilateral/Bilateral Cochlear Implant in a Developing Country

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of unilateral and bilateral cochlear implantation (CI) for children suffering from bilateral profound SNHL.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cost benefit analysis study where quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and the expenditure involved post unilateral and bilateral CI were calculated to assess the cost per QALY gained.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a tertiary-care hospital in a city of a developing country.

PATIENTS

A total of 59 patients were studied during the years 2015 to 2019 of which a study cohort of 29 patients underwent bilateral cochlear implantation and a control cohort of 30 patients received U/L CI but did not undergo B/L CI.

MAIN OUTCOME

The QALY parameters HUI3 and VAS when patient had no implant, post unilateral and bilateral CI were calculated along with the total lifelong expenditure involved. The outcomes improvement post CI was compared in the study and control groups. The discounted net cost per QALY gained was assessed and compared with the PCGDP of the country for cost effectiveness.

RESULTS

Significant QALY was gained post unilateral and bilateral CI and the expenditure for both was within the cost thresholds. The net costs per QALY gained post the discounting in unilateral and bilateral CI were found to be 1,345 US$ and 1,977 US$ respectively. The PCGDP (nominal) of India in 2018 was 2,016 US$. The cost involved per QALY gained was found to be lesser than the per capita GDP of India.

CONCLUSION

Unilateral CI was found to be highly cost effective with bilateral CI involving a little higher cost per QALY gained but well within the cost effectiveness threshold.

Lifetime cost of unilateral cochlear implants in adults: a Monte Carlo simulation

BACKROUND/OBJECTIVE

Due to increasing prevalence of hearing loss and relaxation of candidacy criteria of cochlear implant (CI) supply, the number of implantations is likely to further increase. Statutory health insurances are facing ever more urgent financing challenges since CI treatment causes high life-long costs. Additionally, increasing life expectancy and earlier implantation may extend therapy time and cost. With every case being individual, this study aims to calculate the possible lifetime cost of unilateral CI treatment in adults including stochastic uncertainties.

METHODS

Taking a statutory health insurance perspective, relevant cost components of CI therapy and their values were identified. The Monte Carlo method was used to simulate lifetime cost considering age at first implantation and distributions of costrelevant variables. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the most crucial variables impacting on lifetime cost.

RESULTS

Lifetime cost of CI treatment varies according to age at first implantation, respectively remaining lifetime; the earlier the implantation, the higher the overall cost. According to our simulation, the average lifetime cost for an adult patient first implanted between the age of 20-80 is at 53,030 € (present value). Cost of implantation and periodic speech processor exchanges show the highest impact on the total cost.

DISCUSSION

Health care systems could face rising expenses for CI supply by technical development. Innovative life-long CIs could achieve significant savings per case that could finance additional implant cost. Until then, further targeted research will be required.

CONCLUSION

CI-related cost for statutory health insurance crucially depends on the patient-side demand for cochlear implants. Therefore, cost forecasts must also consider the development of demand.

Age Dependent Cost-Effectiveness of Cochlear Implantation in Adults. Is There an Age Related Cut-off?

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the impact of age at implantation on the cost-effectiveness of cochlear implantation (CI).

STUDY DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis in an adapted Markov model.

SETTING

Adults with profound postlingual hearing loss in a "high income" country.

INTERVENTION

Unilateral and sequential CI were compared with hearing aids (HA).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), calculated as costs per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained (in CHF/QALY), for individual age and sex combinations in relation to two different willingness to pay thresholds. 1 CHF (Swiss franc) is equivalent to 1.01 USD.

RESULTS

When a threshold of 50,000 CHF per QALY is applied, unilateral CI in comparison to HA is cost-effective up to an age of 91 for women and 89 for men. Sequential CI in comparison to HA is cost-effective up to an age of 87 for women and 85 for men. If a more contemporary threshold of 100,000 CHF per QALY is applied, sequential CI in comparison to unilateral CI is cost-effective up to an age of 80 for women and 78 for men.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing both sequential and unilateral CI is cost-effective up to very advanced ages when compared with hearing aids.

The Benefit of a Wireless Contralateral Routing of Signals (CROS) Microphone in Unilateral Cochlear Implant Recipients

OBJECTIVE

Assess speech outcomes in unilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients after addition of a wireless contralateral routing of signals (CROS) microphone.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Ambulatory.

PATIENTS

Sixteen adult unilateral CI users with nonserviceable hearing on the contralateral side were recruited. Those with AzBio sentence scores of 40 to 80% or Hearing in Noise Test - Quiet (HINT-Q) scores of 60 to 90% with a CI alone were eligible participants.

INTERVENTION

Speech testing was carried out with the CROS on and off.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Speech recognition.

RESULTS

In the consonant-nucleus-consonant test presented in quiet from the front, word scores were 64.4 (CI) and 63.8% (CI + CROS) (p = 0.72), and phoneme scores were 80.2 (CI) and 80.8% (CI + CROS) (p = 0.65). In AzBio sentence testing in quiet, with the signals projected from the contralateral, front, or ipsilateral to the CI, speech perception with the CI alone was 60.8, 75.9, and 79.1%. With the addition of the CROS microphone, using the same speaker arrangement, speech perception was 69.8 (p < 0.05), 71.8 (p = 0.05), and 71.8 (p < 0.05). In AzBio sentence testing in noise, speech perception with the CI alone was 18.6, 45.3, and 56.3% when signals were projected from contralateral, front, and ipsilateral sides to the CI. The addition of the CROS microphone led to speech perception of 45.3 (p < 0.05), 45.3 (p = 0.86), and 51.4% (p = 0.27) in the same paradigm.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of a wireless CROS microphone to a unilateral CI recipient can improve users' perception of speech in both quiet and noise if speech signals come from the deaf ear, mitigating the head shadow effect.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for vaccination of adolescents against serogroup B IMD with the MenB-FHbp vaccine in Canada

OBJECTIVE

Serogroup B meningococci (MnB) are now the largest cause of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) in Canada. We assessed the clinical and economic impact of 3 adolescent MenB-FHbp immunization strategies.

METHODS

A population-based dynamic transmission model was developed to simulate the transmission of MnB among the entire Canadian population over a 30-year time horizon. Age group-based IMD incidence, bacterial carriage and transmission, disease outcomes, costs, and impact on quality of life were obtained from Canadian surveillance data and published literature. The vaccine was assumed to provide 85% protection against IMD and 26.6% against carriage acquisition. The model estimated the impact of routine vaccination with MenB-FHbp in 3 strategies: (1) age 14, along with existing school-based programs, with 75% uptake; (2) age 17 with 75% uptake, assuming school vaccination; and (3) age 17 with 30% uptake, assuming vaccination outside of school. Costs were calculated from the Canadian societal perspective.

RESULTS

With no vaccination, an estimated 3974 MnB cases would be expected over 30 years. Vaccination with strategies 1-3 were estimated to avert 688, 1033, and 575 cases, respectively. These outcomes were associated with incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year of $976,000, $685,000, and $490,000.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model indicated that if the vaccine reduces risk of carriage acquisition, vaccination of older adolescents, even at lower uptake, could have a significant public health impact. Due to low disease incidence, MnB vaccination is unlikely to meet widely accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds, but evaluations of new programs should consider the overall benefits of the vaccination.

Subjective and objective vestibular changes that occur following paediatric cochlear implantation: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Cochlear implantation can result in post-operative vestibular dysfunction of unknown clinical significance. The objective of this study was to characterize the presence, magnitude, and clinical significance of vestibular dysfunction that occurs after pediatric cochlear implantation.

Data sources

The databases Embase, Medline (OvidSP), and PubMed were used. Only articles published in English were included. Grey literature and unpublished sources were also reviewed.

Study selection

Articles published from 1980 until the present which documented pre-operative and post-operative vestibular testing on children under the age of 18 were used.

Data extraction

Parameters that were assessed included number of patients, pre- and post-operative vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs), head impulse testing (HIT), calorics, and posturography, timing of pre- and post-operative testing, symptomatology, and other demographic data such as etiology of the hearing loss.

Data synthesis

Ten articles were included. Relative risk values evaluating the effect of cochlear implantation on vestibular function were calculated for VEMPs and caloric testing due to the availability of published data. I² values were calculated and 95% confidence intervals were reported. Separate analyses were conducted for each individual study and a pooled analysis was conducted to yield an overall relative risk. Assessment on risk of bias in individual studies and overall was performed.

Conclusion

Pediatric cochlear implantation is associated with a statistically significant decrease in VEMP responses post-operatively (RR 1.8, p < 0.001, I² 91.86, 95%CI 1.57–2.02). Similar results are not seen in caloric testing. Insufficient data is available for analysis of HIT and posturography. Further studies are necessary to determine the effect of cochlear implantation on objective vestibular measures post-operatively and whether any changes seen are clinically relevant in this population.

Benefits of a contralateral routing of signal device for unilateral Naída CI cochlear implant recipients

PURPOSE

Many bilaterally deaf adults are only able to receive one cochlear implant (CI), resulting in suboptimal listening performance, especially in challenging listening environments. Adding a contralateral routing of signal (CROS) device to a unilateral CI is one possibility to alleviate these challenges. This study examined the benefit of such a CROS device.

METHODS

Thirteen adult subjects with at least 6 months of CI use, and no or limited benefit of a hearing instrument in the contralateral ear were included in the study. The perceived benefit of a CROS device in everyday listening environments was evaluated up to 1 year after initial fitting using several questionnaires. Speech intelligibility performance was determined using the French matrix sentence test in quiet and in two speech-in-noise setups and was followed for 3 months after CROS fitting.

RESULTS

Subjects indicated high satisfaction with the practical usability of the CROS device and long-term device retention was high. Perceived benefits in everyday listening environments were reported. Formal speech intelligibility tests revealed statistically significant median improvements of 6.93 dB SPL (Wilcoxon Z = 2.380, p = 0.017) in quiet and up to 8.00 dB SNR (Wilcoxon Z = 2.366, p = 0.018) in noise. These benefits were accessible immediately without a need for prolonged acclimatization.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjective satisfaction and device retention as well as speech intelligibility benefits in quiet and in noise prove the CROS device to be a valuable addition to a unilateral CI in cases of bilateral deafness where bilateral implantation is not an option.

Frontal brain asymmetries as effective parameters to assess the quality of audiovisual stimuli perception in adult and young cochlear implant users

How is music perceived by cochlear implant (CI) users? This question arises as “the next step” given the impressive performance obtained by these patients in language perception. Furthermore, how can music perception be evaluated beyond self-report rating, in order to obtain measurable data? To address this question, estimation of the frontal electroencephalographic (EEG) alpha activity imbalance, acquired through a 19-channel EEG cap, appears to be a suitable instrument to measure the approach/withdrawal (AW index) reaction to external stimuli. Specifically, a greater value of AW indicates an increased propensity to stimulus approach, and vice versa a lower one a tendency to withdraw from the stimulus. Additionally, due to prelingually and postlingually deafened pathology acquisition, children and adults, respectively, would probably differ in music perception. The aim of the present study was to investigate children and adult CI users, in unilateral (UCI) and bilateral (BCI) implantation conditions, during three experimental situations of music exposure (normal, distorted and mute). Additionally, a study of functional connectivity patterns within cerebral networks was performed to investigate functioning patterns in different experimental populations. As a general result, congruency among patterns between BCI patients and control (CTRL) subjects was seen, characterised by lowest values for the distorted condition (vs. normal and mute conditions) in the AW index and in the connectivity analysis. Additionally, the normal and distorted conditions were significantly different in CI and CTRL adults, and in CTRL children, but not in CI children. These results suggest a higher capacity of discrimination and approach motivation towards normal music in CTRL and BCI subjects, but not for UCI patients. Therefore, for perception of music CTRL and BCI participants appear more similar than UCI subjects, as estimated by measurable and not self-reported parameters.

The Advances in Hearing Rehabilitation and Cochlear Implants in China

Hearing loss (HL) is a common sensory impairment in humans, with significant economic and social impacts. With nearly 20% of the world's population, China has focused on economic development and health awareness to improve the care for its hearing-impaired population. Recently, the Chinese government has initiated national programs such as the China Disabled Persons Federation to fund prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation of hearing impairment. Newborn hearing screening and auditory rehabilitation programs in China have expanded exponentially with government support. While facing many challenges and overcoming obstacles, cochlear implantation (CI) programs in China have also experienced considerable growth. This review discusses the implementation of CI programs for HL in China and presents current HL data including epidemiology, newborn hearing screening, and determination of genetic etiologies. Sharing the experience in Chinese auditory rehabilitation and CI programs will shine a light on the developmental pathway of healthcare infrastructure to meet emerging needs of the hearing-impaired population in other developing countries.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pediatric Cochlear Implantation in Rural China

Objectives:

To evaluate the cost utility of cochlear implantation (CI) for severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) among children from rural settings in P.R. China (China).

Research Design:

A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was undertaken using data generated from a single-center substudy of the Cochlear^TM Pediatric Implanted Recipient Observational Study (Cochlear P-IROS). The data were projected over a 20-year time horizon using a decision tree model.

Setting:

The Chinese healthcare payer and patient perspectives were adopted.

Intervention:

Unilateral CI of children with a severe-to-profound SNHL compared with their preimplantation state of no treatment or amplification with hearing aids (“no CI” status).

Main Outcome Measure/s:

Incremental costs per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

Results:

The mean total discounted cost of unilateral CI was CNY 252,506 (37,876 USD), compared with CNY 29,005 (4,351 USD) for the no CI status from the healthcare payer plus patient perspective. A total discounted benefit of 8.9 QALYs was estimated for CI recipients compared with 6.7 QALYs for the no CI status. From the healthcare payer plus patient perspective, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for unilateral CI compared with no CI was CNY 100,561 (15,084 USD) per QALY. The healthcare payer perspective yielded an ICER of CNY 40,929 (6,139 USD) per QALY. Both ICERs fell within one to three times China's gross domestic product per capita (GDP, 2011–2015), considered “cost-effective” by World Health Organization (WHO) standards.

Conclusions:

Treatment with unilateral CI is a cost-effective hearing solution for children with severe to profound SNHL in rural China. Increased access to mainstream education and greater opportunities for employment, are potential downstream benefits of CI that may yield further societal and economic benefits. CI may be considered favorably for broader inclusion in medical insurance schemes across China.

Quality of Life and Cost-Effectiveness of Cochlear Implants: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVES

To review evidence regarding the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and cost-effectiveness of unilateral and bilateral cochlear implantation (CI) among children and adults with severe-to-profound hearing loss.

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

METHODS

Publications related to quality of life (QoL) and costs of care in CI were acquired through searches in English-language databases. Studies were included if they had identified the HRQoL attainment, cost of care, cost-utility, or cost-effectiveness associated with CI.

RESULTS

57 studies were critically reviewed. The QoL outcome metrics used in these articles were divided into 2 categories - generic and condition specific. In studies investigating children, many reported no significant difference in QoL attainment between CI recipients and normal-hearing peers. In adults, significant improvements in QoL after implantation and higher QoL than in their nonimplanted (hearing-aided) peers were frequently reported. Studies involving an older adult cohort reported significant improvement in QoL after implantation, which was often independent of audiological performance. Overall, the calculated cost-utility ratios consistently met the threshold of cost acceptance, indicating acceptable values for expenditures on CI.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable work has been done on the QoL attainment and health economic implications of CI. Unilateral CI across all age groups leads to reported sustained benefits in the recipients' overall and disease-specific QoL. With increased cost associated with bilateral CI, further study is needed to characterize its costs and benefits with respect to the recipients' health, well-being, and contributions to society.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Cochlear Implantation in Australian Adults

OBJECTIVES

Sequential and simultaneous bilateral cochlear implants are emerging as appropriate treatment options for Australian adults with sensory deficits in both cochleae. Current funding of Australian public hospitals does not provide for simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation (CI) as a separate surgical procedure. Previous cost-effectiveness studies of sequential and simultaneous bilateral CI assumed 100% of unilaterally treated patients' transition to a sequential bilateral CI. This assumption does not place cochlear implantation in the context of the generally treated population. When mutually exclusive treatment options exist, such as unilateral CI, sequential bilateral CI, and simultaneous bilateral CI, the mean costs of the treated populations are weighted in the calculation of incremental cost-utility ratios. The objective was to evaluate the cost-utility of bilateral hearing aids (HAs) compared with unilateral, sequential, and simultaneous bilateral CI in Australian adults with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis of secondary sources input to a Markov model.

SETTING

Australian health care perspective, lifetime horizon with costs and outcomes discounted 5% annually.

INTERVENTION

Bilateral HAs as treatment for bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss compared with unilateral, sequential, and simultaneous bilateral CI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental costs per quality adjusted life year (AUD/QALY).

RESULTS

When compared with bilateral hearing aids the incremental cost-utility ratio for the CI treatment population was AUD11,160/QALY. The incremental cost-utility ratio was weighted according to the number of patients treated unilaterally, sequentially, and simultaneously, as these were mutually exclusive treatment options.

CONCLUSION

No peer-reviewed articles have reported the incremental analysis of cochlear implantation in a continuum of care for surgically treated populations with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Unilateral, sequential, and simultaneous bilateral CI were cost-effective when compared with bilateral hearing aids. Technologies that reduce the total number of visits for a patient could introduce additional cost efficiencies into clinical practice.

Economic Evaluation of Treatments for Pediatric Bilateral Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss: An Australian Perspective

OBJECTIVES

In Australia, surgical treatment options for children with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss exist in a continuum ranging from unilateral cochlear implantation (CI), sequential bilateral CI through to simultaneous bilateral CI, depending on the condition. When treatment options are mutually exclusive, the mean costs and benefits of each treatment group are summed together to obtain the total mean costs and benefits. This enables an incremental analysis of treatment options in the context of the treated populations.The objective was to evaluate the cost-utility of current Australian CI treatment practices in children using domestic costs and consequences when compared with bilateral hearing aids (HAs).

RESEARCH DESIGN

Economic evaluation including a Markov model based on secondary sources.

SETTING

The base case modeled a government health payer perspective over a child's lifetime. Primary and secondary school education costs were also assessed.

INTERVENTION

Bilateral HAs compared with CI, including unilateral, sequential bilateral, or simultaneous bilateral CI weighted according to treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental costs per quality adjusted life year.

RESULTS

Approximately 42% of children in Australia with unilateral CI did not transition to sequential bilateral nor undergo simultaneous bilateral implantation. This differs from previous economic evaluations that assumed 100% of children transitioned to sequential bilateral CI treatment or were treated with simultaneous bilateral CI.The incremental cost utility of unilateral cochlear implantation compared with HAs was AUD 21,947/QALY. The weighted average incremental cost utility of the combined cochlear implantation treatment groups was AUD 31,238/QALY when compared with HAs.

CONCLUSION

Previous economic evaluations of cochlear implantation assumed 100% of unilaterally treated patients would transition to sequential bilateral or be treated with simultaneous bilateral implantation. This approach does not take into account the total treated population, where a proportion of patients are treated with unilateral CI.CI was cost effective when compared with HAs, and included children treated with unilateral, sequential bilateral, and simultaneous bilateral CI.The model was sensitive to the number of assessment and habilitation visits. Alternative health service models with cost efficiencies are needed to reduce after care costs.

Cost-effectiveness of pediatric bilateral cochlear implantation in Spain

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implantation for 1-year-old children suffering from bilateral sensorineural severe to profound hearing loss from the perspective of the Spanish public health system.

STUDY DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a general-population survey to estimate the quality-of-life increase contributed by the second implant. We built a Markov influence diagram and evaluated it for a life-long time horizon with a 3% discount rate in the base case.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of simultaneous bilateral implantation with respect to unilateral implantation for 1-year-old children with severe to profound deafness is €10,323 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). For sequential bilateral implantation, it rises to €11,733/QALY. Both options are cost-effective for the Spanish health system, whose willingness to pay is estimated at around €30,000/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that the probability of bilateral implantation being cost-effective reaches 100% for that cost-effectiveness threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral implantation is clearly cost-effective for the population considered. If possible, it should be done simultaneously (i.e., in one surgical operation), because it is as safe and effective as sequential implantation, and saves costs for the system and for users and their families. Sequential implantation is also cost-effective for children who have received the first implant recently, but it is difficult to determine when it ceases to be so because of the lack of detailed data. These results are specific for Spain, but the model can easily be adapted to other countries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2C. Laryngoscope, 127:2866-2872, 2017.

Provincial Variation of Cochlear Implantation Surgical Volumes and Cost in Canada

Objectives To investigate provincial cochlear implantation (CI) annual volume and cost trends. Study Design Database analysis. Setting National surgical volume and cost database. Subjects and Methods Aggregate-level provincial CI volumes and cost data for adult and pediatric CI surgery from 2005 to 2014 were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Population-level aging forecast estimates were obtained from the Ontario Ministry of Finance and Statistics Canada. Linear fit, analysis of variance, and Tukey's analyses were utilized to compare variances and means. Results The national volume of annual CI procedures is forecasted to increase by <30 per year ( R² = 0.88). Ontario has the highest mean annual CI volume (282; 95% confidence interval, 258-308), followed by Alberta (92.0; 95% confidence interval, 66.3-118), which are significantly higher than all other provinces ( P < .05 for each). Ontario's annual CI procedure volume is forecasted to increase by <11 per year ( R² = 0.62). Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have the highest CI procedures per 100,000 residents as compared with all other provinces ( P < .05). Alberta, Newfoundland, and Manitoba have the highest estimated implantation cost of all provinces ( P < .05). Conclusions Historical trends of CI forecast modest national volume growth. Potential bottlenecks include provincial funding and access to surgical expertise. The proportion of older adult patients who may benefit from a CI will rise, and there may be insufficient capacity to meet this need. Delayed access to CI for pediatric patients is also a concern, given recent reports of long wait times for CI surgery.

Effect of day-case unilateral cochlear implantation in adults on general and disease-specific quality of life, postoperative complications and hearing results, tinnitus, vertigo and cost-effectiveness: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Cochlear implantation is an increasingly common procedure in the treatment of severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in children and adults. It is often performed as a day-case procedure. The major drive towards day-case surgery has been from a logistical, economical and societal perspective, but we also speculate that the patient's quality of life (QoL) is at least equal to inpatient surgery if not increased as a result of rapid discharge and rehabilitation. Even though cochlear implantation seems well suited to a day-case approach and this even seems to be common practice in some countries, evidence is scarce and of low quality to guide us towards the preferred treatment option.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A single-centre, non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial was designed to (primarily) investigate the effect on general QoL of day-case cochlear implantation compared to inpatient cochlear implantation and (secondarily) the effect of both methods on (subjective) hearing improvement, disease-specific QoL, tinnitus, vertigo and cost-effectiveness. 30 adult patients with severe to profound bilateral postlingual SNHL who are eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation will be randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group. The outcome measures will be assessed using auditory evaluations, questionnaires (preoperatively, at 1-week, 3-week, 3-month and 1-year follow-up) and costs diaries (weekly during the first month postoperatively, after which once in a month until 1-year follow-up). Preoperative and postoperative outcomes will be compared. The difference in costs and benefit will be represented using the incremental cost utility/effectiveness ratio. The analyses will be carried out on an intention-to-treat basis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This research protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the UMC Utrecht (NL45590.041.13; V.5, November 2015). The trial results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed medical journals and presented at scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR4464; Pre-results.

Sequential bilateral cochlear implantation improves working performance, quality of life, and quality of hearing

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective study shows that working performance, quality of life (QoL), and quality of hearing (QoH) are better with two compared with a single cochlear implant (CI). The impact of the second CI on the patient's QoL is as significant as the impact of the first CI.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits of sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in working, QoL, and QoH.

METHODS

We studied working performance, work-related stress, QoL, and QoH with specific questionnaires in 15 patients with unilateral CI scheduled for sequential CI of another ear. Sound localization performance and speech perception in noise were measured with specific tests. All questionnaires and tests were performed before the second CI surgery and 6 and 12 months after its activation.

RESULTS

Bilateral CIs increased patients' working performance and their work-related stress and fatigue decreased. Communication with co-workers was easier and patients were more active in their working environment. Sequential bilateral cochlear implantation improved QoL, QoH, sound localization, and speech perception in noise statistically significantly.

Cochlear implantation: a biomechanical prosthesis for hearing loss

Cochlear implants are a medical prosthesis used to treat sensorineural deafness, and one of the greatest advances in modern medicine. The following article is an overview of cochlear implant technology. The history of cochlear implantation and the development of modern implant technology will be discussed, as well as current surgical techniques. Research regarding expansion of candidacy, hearing preservation cochlear implantation, and implantation for unilateral deafness are described. Lastly, innovative technology is discussed, including the hybrid cochlear implant and the totally implantable cochlear implant.

Short-term risk of falling after cochlear implantation

Cochlear implantation is a highly effective intervention for hearing loss, but insertion of an implant into the cochlea is often accompanied by loss of residual hearing function. Sometimes, postoperative testing also shows loss of function in the semicircular canals or otolith organs. The effect of this loss on equilibrium, particularly in the short term following surgery, and the risk of falling due to this loss is unknown. We prospectively measured balance in 16 consecutive adult cochlear implant patients before and 2 weeks after surgery. Subjects stood on a foam pad with eyes closed, feet together and arms at the side. The length of time over which this posture could be maintained was recorded up to a maximum value of 30 s indicating normal performance. Ten of 16 subjects reached a maximal time on preoperative testing. Nine of 16 subjects lost balance function after surgery. Four of the 10 subjects with normal preoperative balance function lost function. Subjects older than the age of 60 were more likely to lose balance function than younger subjects. We used previously published values relating balance performance on foam to risk of falling to calculate the fall risk among our subjects. The relative risk of falling increased after surgery by more than threefold in some patients. Imbalance after cochlear implantation may be much more common, particularly in the short term, than previously appreciated. This imbalance is accompanied by an increased risk of falling in many patients. Careful preoperative counseling before implantation and postoperative therapeutic intervention to improve comfort and reduce the chance of falling may be warranted, particularly in patients at a risk for injuries from falls (level of evidence: 2b).