Functional use of the nucleus® 22‐channel cochlear implant in the elderly

Horn, Karl L.; McMahon, Nancy B.; Mcmahon, Daniel C.; Lewis, Jan S.; Barker, Mary; Gherini, S

doi:10.1288/00005537-199103000-00011

Cited by 53 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Older patients experienced a higher subjective satisfaction after cochlear implantation, regardless of their CI audiometric benefit. Similar and consistent results had been previously observed by different studies in the past [8,[25][26][27][28] . Numerous large scale studies have demonstrated that several previous patient attributes condition cochlear implantation outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Cochlear Implant Evaluation: Prognosis Estimation by Data Mining System

Guerra-Jiménez¹,

Á²,

Jc³

et al. 2016

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE:Prediction of speech recognition (SR) and quality of life (QoL) outcomes after cochlear implantation is one of the most important challenges for otologists. By sifting through very large amounts of data, data mining reveals trends, patterns, and relationships that might otherwise have remained undetected. There are identifiable pre-implantational factors that condition the cochlear implantation outcome. Our objective is to design a data mining system to predict and classify cochlear implant (CI) predictable benefits in terms of SR and QoL in each patient. MATERIALS and METHODS:This is an observational study of CI users for at least one year. Audiological benefits and its relation to QoL are analyzed using the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and the Specific Questionnaire (SQ). Sociodemographic and medical variables are processed in SPSS Statistics 19.0, MatLab® and Weka®. Classifiers are designed using the nearest neighbour and decision tree algorithms. Estimators are created by linear logistic regression. RESULTS:A total of 29 patients (mean age, 55.3 years; 52% female and 48% male) including 48% unilateral CI users and 51% bimodal CI users were included in the study. GBI improved by 36 points and SQ by 1.7 (p<0.05). Using Nearest Neighbour (IB1) algorithm for classifiers, interesting attributes were identified for SR and SQ result classification (success rate: 80.7%). Decision tree algorithm (J48) showed influencing variables for GBI (success rate: 81%). Estimators by linear logistic regression analysis disclosed a precision of 85%, 68%, and 71% for SR, GBI, and SQ, respectively. CONCLUSION:Our study proposes a systematized system to classify and estimate SR and QoL improvement based on our initial evaluation to complement decision making and patients' information.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Cochlear Implant Evaluation: Prognosis Estimation by Data Mining System

Guerra-Jiménez¹,

Á²,

Jc³

et al. 2016

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies generally included only a small number of older adult CI patients ranging from sample sizes of 27 to 67 individuals. 13,12 The average length of follow-up in previous studies (ranging from 1.8 to 4.2 years) 12, 14 was also relatively less than in our cohort (mean 5.2 years, range 0-13.5 years). Importantly, we utilized Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard methods to analyze our data which Rates of regular CI use in older adults in the current study exceed 80% at greater than 10 years of follow-up which suggests that the vast majority of older adults continue to obtain practical benefit from the CI on a daily basis.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 44%

“…[28][29][30] Previous studies have demonstrated that rates of regular CI use in older adults have ranged from 84% to 100%. [12][13][14][15] However, comparing these rates to results from the current study is difficult as the definition of regular CI use, the number of older adults in the study population, and the length of follow-up vary substantially by report. Our study uses a relatively conservative definition of regular CI use (≥ 8 hours per day) compared to previous studies which utilized definitions ranging from > 0 hour per day to ≥ 8 hours per day.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, we utilized Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard methods to analyze our data which allows us to account for censored individuals (e.g, patients who are lost to follow-up, have different durations of follow-up, or who have died). Previous studies have simply calculated the fraction of regular CI users at one time point, [12][13][14][15] and they may have overestimated the rates of regular CI users by excluding individuals who were lost to follow-up due to death or other reasons.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have reported results only in small cohorts of older adults with limited durations of follow-up. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] The purpose of our study was to investigate long-term rates of CI use in a consecutive case series of older adults (≥60 years) who received their first CI from 1999-2011. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Long‐term Use of Cochlear Implants in Older Adults: Results from a Large Consecutive Case Series

Choi¹,

Contrera²,

Betz³

et al. 2014

Otolaryngol.--head neck surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONHearing loss is prevalent in one in three people over the age of 50, and two-thirds of those older than 70 years. 1 Hearing loss in older adults impairs verbal communication, contributes to social isolation, 2 and has been independently associated with poorer cognitive functioning [3][4][5] and incident dementia. [6][7] While hearing aids improve audibility for most individuals with mild to moderate hearing loss, those who suffer from severe to profound hearing loss generally may acquire greater benefit from electrical hearing provided by a cochlear implant (CI). 8 Currently, the number of older adults in the United States who would potentially meet audiologic criteria for a CI is approximately 150,000, 1 but less than 5% of these older adults are likely to have received a CI System. 9 Many factors could potentially account for the low rate of CI use in older adults, such as a general perception of hearing loss being an inconsequential part of aging and poor awareness of and access to cochlear implantation. Additionally, there are concerns about whether older adults could practically benefit from CI on a daily basis. Older adults can consistently acquire improved speech perception scores after CI in the clinical setting, 10 but patterns of CI use by older adults has received little review. Previous studies have reported results only in small cohorts of older adults with limited durations of follow-up. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] The purpose of our study was to investigate long-term rates of CI use in a consecutive case series of older adults (≥60 years) who received their first CI from 1999-2011. MATERIALS AND METHODS STUDY COHORTWe queried the Johns Hopkins Listening Center database to retrieve all patients ≥ 60 years who received a first CI from 1999 to June 2011 (n = 447). The purpose of this study was to investigate rates of CI use in older adults which is generally defined by the United Nations as adults ≥ 60 years. 33 Of these patients, we were able to successfully obtain follow-up information from the patient or a proxy respondent for 397 individuals (89%) from June to August 2012, and these individuals comprise our analytic cohort. Characteristics of "responders" (n = 397) and "non-responders" (n = 50) did not differ significantly by age of implantation, onset of hearing loss, side of implantation, or manufacturer (data not shown). Non-responders were more likely to have been implanted earlier in the study time period than responders (p < .001). Of the 50 non-responders, 27 (54%) had died based on Social Security Death Index records. For these deceased non-responders, we were unable to obtain proxy information on their CI use at the time of death due to unavailable contact information for surviving family members. This study was approved by Johns Hopkins Institutional Review Board. DATA COLLECTION ON CI USEAs part of a quality assurance initiative at the Johns Hopkins Listening Center, we contacted all CI patients and their families to survey their daily CI use. Postal and email survey...

show abstract

Cochlear implant surgery in patients more than seventy‐nine years old

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the first study to focus on a patient group this advanced in age. With increasing life expectancy, we should begin to stratify risk versus benefit of cochlear implantation in this age group. Cochlear implantation improved audiologic performance and the quality of life in patients older than 79 years old. There were no permanent medical or surgical complications. Chronic pain and temporary vertigo were the most common complications reported in this elderly group. Laryngoscope, 2009.

show abstract

Functional use of the nucleus® 22‐channel cochlear implant in the elderly

Cited by 53 publications

References 4 publications

Cochlear Implant Evaluation: Prognosis Estimation by Data Mining System

Cochlear Implant Evaluation: Prognosis Estimation by Data Mining System

Long‐term Use of Cochlear Implants in Older Adults: Results from a Large Consecutive Case Series

Cochlear implant surgery in patients more than seventy‐nine years old

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About