Rehabilitation of telephone communication in cochlear-implanted adults

Systematic Review of Auditory Training Outcomes in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes

Objective: to review evidence on the efficacy of auditory training in adult cochlear implant recipients. Data Sources: PRISMA guidelines for a systematic review of the literature were followed. PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were queried on 29 June 2023 for terms involving cochlear implantation and auditory training. Studies were limited to the English language and adult patient populations. Study Selection: Three authors independently reviewed publications for inclusion in the review based on a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria encompassed adult cochlear implant populations, an analysis of clinician- or patient-directed auditory training, and an analysis of one or more measures of speech recognition and/or patient-reported outcome. Exclusion criteria included studies with only pediatric implant populations, music or localization training in isolation, and single-sample case studies. Data Extraction: The data were collected regarding study design, patient population, auditory training modality, auditory training timing, speech outcomes, and data on the durability of outcomes. A quality assessment of the literature was performed using a quality metric adapted from the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group guidelines. Data Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: Data were qualitatively summarized for 23 studies. All but four studies demonstrated significant improvement in at least one measured or patient-reported outcome measure with training. For 11 studies with sufficient data reporting, pre-intervention and post-intervention pooled means of different outcome measures were compared for 132 patients using meta-analysis. Patient-direct training was associated with significant improvement in vowel-phoneme recognition and speech recognition in noise (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively), and clinician-directed training showed significant improvement in sentence recognition in noise (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The literature on auditory training for adult cochlear implant recipients is limited and heterogeneous, including a small number of studies with limited levels of evidence and external validity. However, the current evidence suggests that auditory training can improve speech recognition in adult cochlear implant recipients.

Factors Influencing Postoperative Experiences in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients: A Multistakeholder Perspective

OBJECTIVE

To explore factors influencing postoperative experiences of adult cochlear implant (CI) recipients, determine the impact of each factor, and conceptualize recipients' postoperative journey.

STUDY DESIGN

Participatory mixed methods; concept mapping.

SETTING

Tertiary care (private and public).

PATIENTS

Ninety-three participated in the brainstorming activity. Eighty-nine completed the sorting tasks (96% retention rate): CI recipients (n = 44), significant others (n = 13), CI audiologists (n = 14) and surgeons (n = 5), CI clinics' administration staff (n = 5) and managers (n = 3), and CI manufactures' clinical support staff (n = 5).

INTERVENTIONS

Rehabilitative (CIs).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Statements were generated and rated by participants. Similarity of grouping of the statements informed the matrices used for cluster analysis to form concepts.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven unique statements described the factors influencing adapting to, use, and maintenance of CIs after implantation. These were grouped, and five concepts were identified: financial considerations, complications, device usability and durability, device programming and adaptation, and patient motivation and supports. Although statements within the concepts financial considerations and complications were negatively rated, statements within the concepts device programming and adaptation, and patient motivation and supports were mostly rated as having positive influence in patients' postoperative journey. The concept device usability and durability contained both negatively and positively rated statements.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative experience of adult CI recipients is a multifaceted journey with several challenges to address to improve services. Although support from and connection with family and clinicians, and simplicity of using a CI device facilitated the experience, medical and surgical complications, durability, and cost of maintaining the device challenged the postoperative experience.

The Development of the "Telislife" Questionnaire for the Evaluation of Telephone Use in Cochlear Implant Users

Purpose For cochlear implant users, the ability to use the telephone is often seen as an important landmark during rehabilitation and an indicator of cochlear implant benefit. The goal of this study was to develop a short questionnaire exploring the ability to use the telephone in cochlear implant users, named Telislife, and test it in a group of experienced users. Method This prospective multicenter study was based on the completion of self-administrated questionnaires. The Telislife includes 20 items using a 5-point Likert scale for answers. Speech recognition scores were obtained with monosyllabic word lists at 70 dB HL. Quality of life was evaluated with the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire. This study included 55 adult patients wearing a cochlear implant for over 1 year. Results The Telislife questionnaire showed excellent reliability (Cronbach's α = .91). A significant correlation was found between Telislife scores and Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire scores (r = .69, p < .001) and speech recognition scores (r = .35, p = .007). Conclusion Given significant correlations between Telislife scores and both speech recognition and quality of life and given its short form, the Telislife questionnaire appears to be a reliable tool to evaluate cochlear implant outcomes in clinical practice. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13322873.