Cochlear Implantation for Patients With Single-Sided Deafness or Asymmetrical Hearing Loss

Zon, Alice van; Peters, Jeroen P. M.; Stegeman, Inge; Smit, A.L.; Grolman, Wilko

doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000000681

Cited by 118 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(63 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…High-level-of-evidence studies concerning CI in patients with SSD are sparse, although the current literature suggests important benefits regarding sound localization, QoL, and tinnitus [16]. Furthermore, its cost-effectiveness may be questionable, since most SSD patients manage well without any rehabilitation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Sided Deafness: The Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life, Quality of Hearing, and Working Performance

Härkönen

Kivekäs²,

Rautiainen³

et al. 2015

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To evaluate the effect of a cochlear implant (CI) on quality of life (QoL), quality of hearing (QoH), and working performance in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD). Methods: Using specific questionnaires, we measured QoL, QoH, and working performance in 7 SSD patients scheduled for CI surgery of the affected ear. Sound localization and speech perception in noise were also assessed. All questionnaires and tests were performed before the CI surgery and at 6 and 12 months after CI activation. Results: The QoL, QoH, sound localization, and speech perception in noise had improved statistically significantly after CI surgery. Communication with co-workers became easier, and the patients were less fatigued after the working day. Conclusions: CI clearly improves QoL, QoH, and working performance in patients with SSD.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Sided Deafness: The Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life, Quality of Hearing, and Working Performance

Härkönen

Kivekäs²,

Rautiainen³

et al. 2015

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contralateral rerouting of signal (CROS) hearing aids [Bosman et al, 2003;Finbow et al, 2015;Hol et al, 2005;Wazen et al, 2003] and percutaneous bone-anchored hearing devices [Faber et al, 2013;Martin et al, 2010;Stewart et al, 2011;Zeitler et al, 2012] have been proposed for the rehabilitation of SSD with different results. More recently, cochlear implant has been suggested for the rehabilitation of SSD [Arndt et al, 2011;Erbele et al, 2015;van Zon et al, 2015;Vermeire and Van de Heyning, 2009].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Audiological Results and Quality of Life of Sophono Alpha 2 Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Implant Users in Single-Sided Deafness

Bernardeschi

Russo

Nguyen³

et al. 2016

Audiol Neurotol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Single-sided deafness (SSD) represents one of the most difficult audiological conditions to rehabilitate. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the audiological benefits and quality of life of patients affected by SSD who had previously been users of the Alpha 1® when upgrading them to the Sophono Alpha 2® external processor (Boulder, Colo., USA). Nine patients were included in the study. They underwent physical examination, free-field speech audiometry at 40 and 60 dB, a hearing-in-noise test (Hirsch's test and the squelch test), the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire, and a specific questionnaire on patient satisfaction with Alpha 1. Afterwards, the Alpha 2 external processor was delivered to all patients, and the above-mentioned protocol was repeated after 1 month with the Alpha 2. A statistically significant improvement was found in the speech discrimination score at 40 dB and in the squelch test when using the Alpha 2 external processor compared to the Alpha 1. Alpha 2 had a good clinical tolerance and gave similar results in the specific questionnaire and the GBI to Alpha 1. In conclusion, the new Alpha 2 external processor represents a safe and effective device for the rehabilitation of SSD, and there is an audiological benefit to upgrading to the Alpha 2 external processor for patients who had previously been users of the Alpha 1. The improvement in quality of life is similar to that with other bone-anchored hearing devices.

show abstract

“…when speech is directed towards the implanted ear and noise towards the non-implanted ear (Blasco and Redleaf, 2014;van Zon et al, 2015). In this listening situation, use of the implant allows the patient to access a copy of the speech signal that is less degraded than that which is accessible using their better ear alone.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies were identified from existing systematic reviews that assessed the evidence for cochlear implantation in adults with unilateral deafness or highly asymmetric hearing loss (Blasco and Redleaf, 2014;Kitterick et al, 2015;van Zon et al, 2015). These reviews were identified through title and abstract searches of the Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Emerging evidence from early-phase studies suggests that cochlear implantation may be an effective way to improve listening skills impaired by unilateral deafness (Blasco and Redleaf, 2014;van Zon et al, 2015) and to alleviate the associated burden . However, the evidence for implantation in unilaterally deaf patients is limited to a few observational studies and it is as yet unclear what factors may determine whether a patient is likely to receive benefit or not.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predicting speech perception outcomes following cochlear implantation in adults with unilateral deafness or highly asymmetric hearing loss

Kitterick

Lucas

2016

Cochlear Implants International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Unilateral deafness and highly asymmetric hearing loss can impair listening abilities in everyday situations, create substantial audiological handicap, and reduce overall quality of life. Preliminary evidence suggests that cochlear implantation may be effective in reversing some of these detrimental effects. Patientlevel data from existing studies were re-analysed to explore potential factors that may be predictive of improved speech perception scores following implantation. Methods: Logistic regression modelling examined whether improved speech perception following implantation under various listening conditions was related to the duration of deafness of the severe-toprofoundly deaf ear and/or the level of hearing in the better ear. Results: Patients with a shorter duration of deafness were more likely to improve in listening conditions that created a less favourable SNR at the implanted ear than the non-implanted ear. Those with more residual hearing in the better ear were more likely to improve in the listening condition that created a less favourable SNR at that ear. Discussion: The analysis suggests that characteristics of both ears may be relevant when seeking to identify those candidates who are likely to obtain benefit to speech perception following cochlear implantation.

show abstract

Cochlear Implantation for Patients With Single-Sided Deafness or Asymmetrical Hearing Loss

Cited by 118 publications

References 39 publications

Single-Sided Deafness: The Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life, Quality of Hearing, and Working Performance

Single-Sided Deafness: The Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life, Quality of Hearing, and Working Performance

Audiological Results and Quality of Life of Sophono Alpha 2 Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Implant Users in Single-Sided Deafness

Predicting speech perception outcomes following cochlear implantation in adults with unilateral deafness or highly asymmetric hearing loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About