Holistic assessment of cochlear implant outcomes using the international classification of functioning disability and health model: data analysis of a longitudinal prospective multicenter study

Ellen Andries; Artur Lorens; Piotr Henryk Skarżyński; Henryk Skarżyński; Miryam Calvino; Javier Gavilán; Luis Lassaletta; Dayse Tavora-Vieira; Aanand Acharya; Anja Kurz; Rudolf Hagen; Ilona Anderson; Karin Koinig; Yassin Abdelsamad; Paul Van de Heyning; Vincent Van Rompaey; Griet Mertens

doi:10.1007/s00405-024-08600-5

Holistic assessment of cochlear implant outcomes using the international classification of functioning disability and health model: data analysis of a longitudinal prospective multicenter study

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024 Apr 4. doi: 10.1007/s00405-024-08600-5. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Ellen Andries^{1

2}, Artur Lorens³, Piotr Henryk Skarżyński^{3

4

5

6}, Henryk Skarżyński³, Miryam Calvino^{7

8}, Javier Gavilán⁷, Luis Lassaletta^{7

8}, Dayse Tavora-Vieira^{9

10

11}, Aanand Acharya⁹, Anja Kurz¹², Rudolf Hagen¹², Ilona Anderson¹³, Karin Koinig¹³, Yassin Abdelsamad¹³, Paul Van de Heyning^{14

15}, Vincent Van Rompaey^{14

15}, Griet Mertens^{14

15}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Antwerp, Belgium. ellen.andries@uza.be.
² Experimental Laboratory of Translational Neurosciences and Dento-Otolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp (UA), Antwerp, Belgium. ellen.andries@uza.be.
³ World Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Kajetany, Warsaw, Poland.
⁴ Center of Hearing and Speech 'Medincus', Kajetany, Poland.
⁵ Department of Teleaudiology and Screening, World Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Kajetany, Warsaw, Poland.
⁶ Institute of Sensory Organs, Kajetany, Poland.
⁷ Department of Otolaryngology, La Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ Institute for Health Research, Madrid, Spain.
⁸ Biomedical Research Networking Centre On Rare Diseases (CIBERER-U761), Institute of Health Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
⁹ Department of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, Fiona Stanley Fremantle Hospital Group, Perth, Australia.
¹⁰ Medical School, Division of Surgery, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
¹¹ Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
¹² Comprehensive Hearing Center, Department of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
¹³ Clinical Research Department, MED-EL GmbH, Innsbruck, Austria.
¹⁴ Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Antwerp, Belgium.
¹⁵ Experimental Laboratory of Translational Neurosciences and Dento-Otolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp (UA), Antwerp, Belgium.

PMID: 38573516
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-024-08600-5

Abstract

Purpose: To study outcome after cochlear implantation using the Cochlear Implant (CI) outcome assessment protocol based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model (CI-ICF).

Methods: Raw data of a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter study was analyzed. Seventy-two CI candidates were assessed preoperatively and six months postoperatively using the CI-ICF protocol. Following tools were used: (1) Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ), (2) Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), (3) Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ), (4) Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12), (5) Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index (HISQUI19), (6) Nijmegen CI Questionnaire (NCIQ) (7) pure tone audiometry, (8) speech audiometry, (9) sound localization.

Results: There was a significant improvement of speech discrimination in quiet (p = 0.015; p < 0.001) and in noise (p = 0.041; p < 0.001), sound detection (p < 0.001), tinnitus (p = 0.026), listening (p < 0.001), communicating with-receiving-spoken messages (p < 0.001), conversation (p < 0.001), family relationships (p < 0.001), community life (p = 0.019), NCIQ total score and all subdomain scores (p < 0.001). Subjective sound localization significantly improved (p < 0.001), while psychometric sound localization did not. There was no significant subjective deterioration of vestibular functioning and no substantial change in sound aversiveness. CI users reported a high level of implant satisfaction postoperatively.

Conclusion: This study highlights the positive impact of cochlear implantation on auditory performance, communication, and subjective well-being. The CI-ICF protocol provides a holistic and comprehensive view of the evolution of CI outcomes.

Keywords: CI outcome evaluation; CI outcomes; Cochlear Implant; ICF.