Revisión de los criterios audiométricos en el tratamiento de la hipoacusia neurosensorial mediante audífonos y prótesis auditivas implantables

[Parameter fitting for cochlear implant]

Programming a patient with cochlear impant follows a standardized and individualized protocol, although there is a percentage of users in which, for some reason, it is not possible to establish appropriate levels of stimulation. In these patients, the audiologist has to make adjustments in some special parameters such as a change in the strategy, stimulation rate, pulse width, among others, in order to obtain an auditory performance as expected.

Clinical and logopaedic results of simultaneous and sequential bilateral implants in children with severe and/or profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss: A literature review

This article carries out a literature review of the advantages and limitations of the simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation (SCI) compared to those of the sequential bilateral cochlear implantation (SBCI) and the unilateral cochlear implantation (UCI). The variables analysed in said comparison are: safety and surgical technique, SCI incidence, effectiveness, impact of the inter-implant interval, costs and financing, impact on brain plasticity, impact on speech and language development, main benefits, main disadvantages and concerns, and predictive factors of prognosis. Although the results are not conclusive, all variables analysed seem to point towards observable benefits of SCI in comparison with SBCI or UCI. This tendency should be studied in more depth in multicentre studies with higher methodological rigour, more comprehensive samples and periods and other determining variables (age at the time of implantation, duration and degree of the hearing loss, rehabilitation methodologies used, family involvement, etc.).

Efficacy of the active middle-ear implant in patients with sensorineural hearing loss

Introduction:

This systematic review aims to advise on the effectiveness of the active middle-ear implant in patients with sensorineural hearing loss, compared with external hearing aids.

Methods:

A systematic search of several electronic databases, including PubMed and Embase, was used to identify relevant studies for inclusion.

Results:

Fourteen comparative studies were included. Nine studies reported on the primary outcome of functional gain: one found that the middle-ear implant was significantly better than external hearing aids (p < 0.001), while another found that external hearing aids were generally significantly better than middle-ear implants (p < 0.05). Six of the seven remaining studies found that middle-ear implants were better than external hearing aids, although generally no clinically significant difference (i.e. ≥10 dB) was seen.

Conclusion:

Generally, the active middle-ear implant appears to be as effective as the external hearing aid in improving hearing outcomes in patients with sensorineural hearing loss.

[Organisation of a cochlear implant programme]

A cochlear implant (CI) programme brings together a number of professionals who, during the stages of selection, surgery, programming, rehabilitation and monitoring, develop a series of tasks aimed at promoting comprehensive attention to the implanted patient. The aim of this paper was to describe in detail the tasks in each of the phases described in a programme of CI, materials and necessary equipment and the role of the professionals involved. It also raised a number of recommendations on how to develop a CI programme gradually to facilitate the progression from the simplest to the most complex cases.