Candidacy criteria for paediatric bilateral cochlear implantation in the United Kingdom

Vickers, Deborah; Summerfield, Quentin; Lovett, Rosemary

doi:10.1179/1467010014z.000000000235

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The criteria for cochlear implant (CI) candidacy in both children and adults are known to have considerable variation between countries and also between some regions within countries. Recent UK research (Lovett et al, 2015;Vickers et al, 2015) looking at candidacy for bilateral implants in children suggests that the current audiometric candidacy criteria (equal to or greater than 90 dB HL at 2 and 4 kHz) may be too strict. Based on this research, it may be more appropriate to relax the criteria to be greater than or equal to 80 dB HL at 2 and 4 kHz.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

International survey of cochlear implant candidacy

Vickers¹,

Raeve

Graham

2016

Cochlear Implants International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results showed differences in the funding model between countries. Unilateral implants for both adults and children and bilateral implants for children were covered by national funding in approximately 60% of countries (30% used medical insurance, and 10% self-funding). Fewer countries provided bilateral implants routinely for adults: national funding was available in only 22% (37% used medical insurance and 41% self-funding). Main evolving candidacy areas are asymmetric losses, auditory neuropathy spectrum disorders and electro-acoustic stimulation. For countries using speech-based adult candidacy assessments, the majority (40%) used word tests, 24% used sentence tests, and 36% used a mixture of both. For countries using audiometry for candidacy (70-80% of countries), the majority used levels of 75-85 dB HL at frequencies above 1 kHz. The United Kingdom and Belgium had the most conservative audiometric criteria, and countries such as Australia, Germany, and Italy were the most lenient. Countries with a purely self-funding model had greater flexibility in candidacy requirements.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

International survey of cochlear implant candidacy

Vickers¹,

Raeve

Graham

2016

Cochlear Implants International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…So, what is the best CI indication and how strict should this be applied? There is a wide variability in CI indication criteria across the countries [ 1 , 6 , 14 – 18 ]. Vickers et al collected information on indication criteria in 17 countries; in general, CI indication criteria were based on either speech recognition with conventional hearing aids (more functional) or based on the audiometric hearing loss or both.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding unilateral cochlear implantation criteria for adults with bilateral acquired severe sensorineural hearing loss

Huinck

Mylanus

Snik

2019

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To report on a retrospective cohort study on the effects of expanding inclusion criteria for application of cochlear implants (CIs) on the performance 1-year post-implantation. Methods Based on pre-implantation audiometric thresholds and aided speech recognition scores, the data of 164 CI recipients were divided into a group of patients that fulfilled conservative criteria (mean hearing loss at 0.5, 1 and 2 kHz > 85 dB HL and phoneme scores with hearing aids < 30%), and the remaining group of patients that felt outside this conservative criterion. Speech recognition scores (in quiet) and quality of life (using the NCIQ) of both groups, measured at 1-year post-implantation, were compared. Results The group that felt outside the conservative criterion showed a higher phoneme score at 1-year post-implantation compared to the conservative group, suggesting that relaxed criteria have a positive influence on the speech recognition results with CI. With respect to quality of life, both groups significantly improved 1-year post-implantation. The conservative group showed a higher benefit on the advanced perception domain of the NCIQ. Based on their worse pre-implantation hearing, this was expected. Conclusions The data suggest that relaxation of CI indication positively affects the speech recognition performance of patients with severe hearing loss. Both groups of patients showed a positive effect of CI on the quality of life. This benefit relates to communication skills and the subjective day-to-day functioning in society.

show abstract