Hearing and Patient Satisfaction Among 19 Patients Who Received Implants Intended for Hybrid Hearing

Abstract

Objectives:To measure patient satisfaction and correlate to hearing results in partially deaf patients, after hearing preservation cochlear implant surgery with hybrid hearing strategy, and to evaluate the stability of residual low-frequency hearing (LFH) over time.Design:A patient satisfaction survey and a retrospective, 2-year follow-up journal study. Nineteen partially deaf patients intended for hybrid hearing responded to a questionnaire when they had used their cochlear implants for at least a year. The questionnaire consisted of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids, EuroQol Group visual analogue scale and nine questions about hybrid hearing. Pure-tone audiometry, monosyllables, and hearing in noise test results from the patients’ medical records were evaluated and compared with the results from the patient satisfaction survey.Results:All of the patients were satisfied with their CIs. The mean International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids score was 29. The CIs provided a major contribution to the speech comprehension of these partially deaf patients. Two years after surgery, the patients’ mean binaural score on tests of monosyllables was 58%, and the mean signal to noise ratio was 4.6 dB. We observed ongoing deteriorations in the residual hearing of the operated ears that surpassed the deteriorations observed in the contralateral ears. One month after surgery, the LFH loss (125–500 Hz) was 17 dB, and after 2 years, this loss was 24 dB compared with 5 dB in the nonoperated ear. There were no significant correlations between preserved LFH and patient satisfaction or speech perception results.Conclusions:Electric stimulation provided a major contribution to speech comprehension of partially deaf patients. The gain reached in speech understanding widely exceeded the downside in losing some residual hearing. All the patients showed a high degree of satisfaction with their CIs regardless of varying hearing preservation.

Genotype-Phenotype Correlation for Predicting Cochlear Implant Outcome: Current Challenges and Opportunities

“…A study that attempted to assess this same issue via a quality of life questionnaire found no significant differences in the quality of life of bilaterally deaf children with a CI and contralateral hearing aid versus bilaterally deaf children with bilateral hearing aids and normal-hearing children ( Perez-Mora et al, 2012 ). Studies investigating long-term patient satisfaction with CI through young adulthood and beyond found similar results as many patients reported that the benefits of CI outweighed any potential loss of residual hearing or other negative side effects ( Galvin et al, 2014 ; Erixon and Rask-Andersen, 2015 ).…”

Long-Term Hearing Outcomes After Hybrid Cochlear Implantation

“…The use of electroacoustic stimulation and hybrid CIs is becoming increasingly common, with rates of hearing preservation rising concordantly in recent years as the use of these devices become more popular (15). Electroacoustic stimulation has been show to lead to higher patient satisfaction and gains in speech understanding even in the face of loss of some residual hearing (16). Its use expands the eligible pool of hearing-impaired subjects who could benefit from insertion of a CI.…”

Treatment of Partial Deafness: The Polish School in World Science

“…Erixon et al in the Ear and Hearing, which has one of the highest Impact Factor journals in this field, have written in 2015: "Skarzynski et al (2012) called the first group electrical complement patients and the second group electro-acoustic stimulation patients" [28]. Von Ilberg with an international group of collaborators in a multicenter study published in the Audiology and Neurotology in 2011 [19] has mentioned: "The most expanded indication for electro-acoustic stimulation (EAS) has been reported by the Warsaw group, who implanted candidates with markedly better acoustic hearing in the frequencies between 125 and 500 Hz.…”