Journal of Health Sciences & Surveillance System

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

News

The Factors Influencing Decision Making to Perform Cochlear Implantation and its Outcomes: A Cluster Analysis

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

2 Rehabilitation Sciences Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

3 Department of Health Promotion and Gerontology, Faculty of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

4 Otolaryngology Research Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

Background: The present study aimed to determine the factors affecting the decision of hearing-impaired adults to perform cochlear implantation (CI) and the impact of each factor on the results of hearing quality, speech understanding, spatial hearing, and quality of life (QoL) after implantation.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, thirty-nine adults with CI completed the Speech, Spatial, and Hearing Quality Scale (SSQ), Quality of Life Standard (SF-12), and Tinnitus Handicap Index (THI) questionnaires. One-way ANOVA and two-step cluster analysis with Schwarz’s Bayesian information criterion as clustering criterion were used to analyze the data.
Results: There was a significant difference between males and females in the total score of QoL, physical health, and age of hearing loss (HL) diagnosis, but not in the SSQ questionnaire. In the mental health of all participants, a significant difference was observed in two levels of THI. Age at implantation and income, age of HL diagnosis, duration of CI, degree of tinnitus, and level of education (literacy) play an important role in QoL, speech comprehension, spatial hearing, mental health, and SSQ, respectively. Some patients’ decisions for CI surgery consisted of tinnitus before implantation, age, sex, income, and QoL.
Conclusion: Some demographic factors are effective in the process of a person’s decision to perform implantation. Besides other implant factors in adult CI candidacy, considering the person’s decision may lead to realistic expectations from the surgery and related results, which can be attended to in counseling before implantation.

Highlights

Afsaneh Doosti (Google Scholar)

Zahra Jeddi (Google Scholar)

Keywords

References
  1. Cohen SM, Labadie RF, Dietrich MS, Haynes DS. Quality of life in hearing-impaired adults: the role of cochlear implants and hearing aids. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;131(4):413-22. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2004.03.026. PMID: 15467610.
  2. Czerniejewska-Wolska H, Kalos M, Sekula A, Piszczatowski B, Rutkowska J, Rogowski M, et al. Quality of life and hearing after cochlear implant placement in patients over 60 years of age. Otolaryngol Pol. 2015;69(4):34-9. doi: 10.5604/00306657.1163575. PMID: 26388358.
  3. Mertens G, Kleine Punte A, De Bodt M, Van de Heyning P. Sound quality in adult cochlear implant recipients using the HISQUI19. Acta Otolaryngol. 2015;135(11):1138-45. doi: 10.3109/00016489.2015.1066934. PMID: 26220300.
  4. Kennedy V, Stephens D, Fitzmaurice P. The impact of cochlear implants from the perspective of significant others of adult cochlear implant users. Otol Neurotol. 2008;29(5):607-14. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e318165652c. PMID: 18401287.
  5. Dedhia K, Worman T, Meredith MA, Rubinstein JT. Patterns of Long-term Hearing Loss in Hearing Preservation Cochlear Implant Surgery. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37(5):478-86. doi:10.1097/MAO.0000000000001011. PMID: 27050648.
  6. Hughes SE, Hutchings HA, Rapport FL, McMahon CM, Boisvert I. Social Connectedness and Perceived Listening Effort in Adult Cochlear Implant Users: A Grounded Theory to Establish Content Validity for a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure. Ear Hear. 2018;39(5):922-34. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000553. PMID: 29424766.
  7. Kan A, Litovsky RY. Binaural hearing with electrical stimulation. Hear Res. 2015;322:127-37. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2014.08.005. PMID: 25193553. PMCID: PMC4346541.
  8. Nava E, Bottari D, Bonfioli F, Beltrame MA, Pavani F. Spatial hearing with a single cochlear implant in late-implanted adults. Hear Res. 2009;255(1-2):91-8. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2009.06.007. PMID: 19539018.
  9. Angelo TCSd, Moret ALM, Costa OAd, Nascimento LT, Alvarenga KdF, editors. Quality of life in adult cochlear implant users. CoDAS; 2016: SciELO Brasil. doi: 10.1590/2317-1782/20162015097. PMID: 27191872.
  10. McRackan TR, Hand BN, Velozo CA, Dubno JR. Association of demographic and hearing-related factors with cochlear implant–related quality of life. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;145(5):422-30. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2019.0055. PMID: 30896742. PMCID: PMC6537791.
  11. Park E, Shipp DB, Chen JM, Nedzelski JM, Lin VY. Postlingually deaf adults of all ages derive equal benefits from unilateral multichannel cochlear implant. J Am Acad Audiol. 2011;22(10):637-43. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.22.10.2. PMID: 22212763.
  12. Derinsu U, Yuksel M, Gecici CR, Ciprut A, Akdeniz E. Effects of residual speech and auditory deprivation on speech perception of adult cochlear implant recipients. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2019;46(1):58-63. doi:10.1016/j.anl.2018.06.006. PMID: 29945747.
  13. Zhang F, Underwood G, McGuire K, Liang C, Moore DR, Fu QJ. Frequency change detection and speech perception in cochlear implant users. Hear Res. 2019;379:12-20. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2019.04.007. PMID: 31035223. PMCID: PMC6571168.
  14. Guerra-Jiménez G, De Miguel ÁR, González JCF, Barreiro SB, Plasencia DP, Macías ÁR. Cochlear implant evaluation: prognosis estimation by data mining system. J Int Adv Otol. 2016;12(1):1-7. doi: 10.5152/iao.2016.510. PMID: 27340975.
  15. Skidmore JA, Vasil KJ, He S, Moberly AC. Explaining Speech Recognition and Quality of Life Outcomes in Adult Cochlear Implant Users: Complementary Contributions of Demographic, Sensory, and Cognitive Factors. Otol Neurotol. 2020;41(7):e795-e803. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002682. PMID: 32558759. PMCID:PMC7875311.
  16. Zhao EE, Dornhoffer JR, Loftus C, Nguyen SA, Meyer TA, Dubno JR, et al. Association of Patient-Related Factors With Adult Cochlear Implant Speech Recognition Outcomes: A Meta-analysis. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;146(7):613-20. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.0662. PMID: 32407461. PMCID: PMC7226297.
  17. Biever A, Amurao C, Mears M. Considerations for a Revised Adult Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation Protocol. Otol Neurotol. 2021;42(1):159-64. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002966. PMID: 33885262.
  18. Ebrahimi-Madiseh A, Eikelboom RH, Bennett RJ, Upson GS, Friedland PL, Swanepoel DW, et al. What influences decision-making for cochlear implantation in adults? Exploring barriers and drivers from a multistakeholder perspective. Ear Hear. 2020;41(6):1752-63. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000895. PMID: 33136648.
  19. Henkin Y, Shapira Y, Yaar Soffer Y. Current demographic and auditory profiles of adult cochlear implant candidates and factors affecting uptake. Int J Audiol. 2022;61(6):483-9. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2021.1941327. PMID: 34191666.
  20. Chundu S, Stephens N. Patients' involvement in choosing a cochlear implant. Cochlear Implants Int. 2013;14(3):165-8. doi: 10.1179/1754762812Y.0000000010. PMID: 22733031.
  21. Looi V, Bluett C, Boisvert I. Referral rates of postlingually deafened adult hearing aid users for a cochlear implant candidacy assessment. Int J Audiol. 2017;56(12):919-25. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2017.1344361. PMID: 28678547.
  22. Athalye S, Archbold S, Mulla I, Lutman M, Nikolopoulous T. Exploring views on current and future cochlear implant service delivery: The perspectives of users, parents and professionals at cochlear implant centres and in the community. Cochlear Implants Int. 2015;16(5):241-53. doi: 10.1179/1754762815Y.0000000003. PMID: 25780991.
  23. Crum M, Nelson T, de Borst J, Byrnes P. The use of cluster analysis in entrepreneurship research: Review of past research and future directions. J Small Bus Manag. 2022;60(4):961-1000. doi: 10.1080/00472778.2020.1748475.
  24. Valls A. ClusDM: A multiple criteria decision making method for heterogeneous data sets: Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya; 2002.
  25. Dilts D, Khamalah J, Plotkin A. Using cluster analysis for medical resource decision making. Med Decis Mak. 1995;15(4):333-46. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9501500404. PMID: 8544677.
  26. Caruso G, Gattone SA, Fortuna F, Di Battista T, editors. Cluster analysis as a decision-making tool: a methodological review. Decision Economics: In the Tradition of Herbert A Simon's Heritage: Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence, 14th International Conference; 2018: Springer.
  27. Young‐Shand KL, Roy PC, Dunbar MJ, Abidi SS, Astephen Wilson JL. Gait biomechanics phenotypes among total knee arthroplasty candidates by machine learning cluster analysis. J Orthop Res. 2023;41(2):335-44. doi: 10.1002/jor.25363. PMID: 35538599.
  28. Noble W, Tyler R, Dunn C, Bhullar N. Unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants and the implant-plus-hearing-aid profile: comparing self-assessed and measured abilities. Int J Audiol. 2008;47(8):505-14. doi: 10.1080/14992020802070770. PMID: 18608531.
  29. Ramakers GG, Smulders YE, Van Zon A, Van Zanten GA, Grolman W, Stegeman I. Correlation between subjective and objective hearing tests after unilateral and bilateral cochlear implantation. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord. 2017;17(1):1-8. doi: 10.1186/s12901-017-0043-y. eCollection 2017. PMID: 29209150. PMCID: PMC5704382.
  30. Lotfi Y, Nazeri AR, Asgari A, Moosavi A, Bakhshi E. Iranian version of speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale: a psychometric study. Acta Medica Iranica. 2016:756-64. PMID: 28120586.
  31. Younsi M, Chakroun M. Measuring health-related quality of life: psychometric evaluation of the Tunisian version of the SF-12 health survey. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(7):2047-54. doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0641-8. PMID: 24515673.
  32. Bagheri H, Shahabi Z, Ebrahimi H, Alaeenejad F. The association between quality of sleep and health-related quality of life in nurses. Hayat. 2007;12(4):13-20.
  33. Habibi Sola A, Nikpour S, Sohbatzadeh R, Haghani H. Quality of life in elderly people of west of Tehran. Iran J Nurs Res. 2008;2(7):29-35.
  34. Jalali MM, Soleimani R, Fallahi M, Aghajanpour M, Elahi M. Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI-P). Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;27(79):83-94. PMID: 25938079. PMCID: PMC4409952.
  35. Wakabayashi S, Oishi N, Shinden S, Ogawa K. Factor analysis and evaluation of each item of the tinnitus handicap inventory. Head Face Med. 2020;16(1):1-9. doi: 10.1186/s13005-020-00217-3. PMID: 32145748. PMCID: PMC7060617.
  36. Benassi M, Garofalo S, Ambrosini F, Sant'Angelo RP, Raggini R, De Paoli G, et al. Using Two-Step Cluster Analysis and Latent Class Cluster Analysis to Classify the Cognitive Heterogeneity of Cross-Diagnostic Psychiatric Inpatients. Front Psychol. 2020;11:1085. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01085. PMID: 32587546. PMCID: PMC7299079.
  37. Bodmer D, Shipp DB, Ostroff JM, Ng AH, Stewart S, Chen JM, et al. A comparison of postcochlear implantation speech scores in an adult population. Laryngoscope. 2007;117(8):1408-11. doi: 10.1097/MLG.0b013e318068b57e. PMID: 17585277.
  38. Lenarz T, Muller L, Czerniejewska-Wolska H, Valles Varela H, Orus Dotu C, Durko M, et al. Patient-Related Benefits for Adults with Cochlear Implantation: A Multicultural Longitudinal Observational Study. Audiol Neurootol. 2017;22(2):61-73. doi: 10.1159/000477533. PMID: 28719901. PMCID: PMC5872560.
  39. Bergman P, Lyxell B, Harder H, Maki-Torkko E. The Outcome of Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: Speech Recognition, Health-Related Quality of Life and Level of Anxiety and Depression: a One- and Three-Year Follow-Up Study. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;24(3):e338-46. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-3399540. PMID: 32754246. PMCID: PMC7394645.
  40. Tokat T, Müderris T, Bozkurt EB, Ergun U, Aysel A, Catli T. Quality of Life in Older Adults with Cochlear Implantation: Can It Be Equal to That of Healthy Older Adults? J Audiol Otol. 2021;25(3):138. doi: 10.7874/jao.2020.00458. PMID: 33853267. PMCID: PMC8311058.
  41. Fellinger J, Holzinger D, Dobner U, Gerich J, Lehner R, Lenz G, et al. Mental distress and quality of life in a deaf population. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2005;40(9):737-42. doi: 10.1007/s00127-005-0936-8. PMID: 16143834.
  42. Ringdahl A, Grimby A. Severe-profound hearing impairment and health-related quality of life among post-lingual deafened Swedish adults. Scand Audiol. 2000;29(4):266-75. doi: 10.1080/010503900750022907. PMID: 11195947.
  43. Sousa AF, Couto MIV, Martinho-Carvalho AC. Quality of life and cochlear implant: results in adults with postlingual hearing loss. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;84(4):494-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2017.06.005. PMID: 28728951. PMCID: PMC9449166.
  44. Kobosko J, Jedrzejczak WW, Pilka E, Pankowska A, Skarzynski H. Satisfaction With Cochlear Implants in Postlingually Deaf Adults and Its Nonaudiological Predictors: Psychological Distress, Coping Strategies, and Self-Esteem. Ear Hear. 2015;36(5):605-18. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000179. PMID: 25973692.
  45. Ciorba A, Benatti A, Bianchini C, Aimoni C, Volpato S, Bovo R, et al. High frequency hearing loss in the elderly: effect of age and noise exposure in an Italian group. J Laryngol Otol. 2011;125(8):776-80. doi: 10.1017/S0022215111001101. PMID: 21729437.
  46. Fioretti A, Natalini E, Riedl D, Moschen R, Eibenstein A. Gender comparison of psychological comorbidities in tinnitus patients–results of a cross-sectional study. Front Neurosci. 2020:704. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.00704. PMID: 32774239. PMCID: PMC7381348.
  47. Nolan LS. Age‐related hearing loss: Why we need to think about sex as a biological variable. J Neurosci Res. 2020;98(9):1705-20. doi: 10.1002/jnr.24647. PMID: 32557661.
  48. Arts RA, George EL, Stokroos RJ, Vermeire K. Cochlear implants as a treatment of tinnitus in single-sided deafness. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;20(5):398-403. doi: 10.1097/MOO.0b013e3283577b66. PMID: 22931903.
  49. Pierzycki RH, Kitterick PT. Insomnia, Anxiety and Depression in Adult Cochlear Implant Users With Tinnitus. Ear Hear. 2021;42(1):235-43. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000900. PMID: 32568801.
  50. Kloostra FJ, Arnold R, Hofman R, Van Dijk P. Changes in tinnitus after cochlear implantation and its relation with psychological functioning. Audiol Neurootol. 2015;20(2):81-9. doi: 10.1159/000365959. PMID: 25531170.
  51. Farinetti A, Ben Gharbia D, Mancini J, Roman S, Nicollas R, Triglia JM. Cochlear implant complications in 403 patients: comparative study of adults and children and review of the literature. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2014;131(3):177-82. doi: 10.1016/j.anorl.2013.05.005. PMID: 24889283.
  52. Opperman E, le Roux T, Masenge A, Eikelboom RH. The effect of tinnitus on hearing-related quality of life outcomes in adult cochlear implant recipients. Int J Audiol. 2021;60(4):246-54. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2020.1828633. PMID: 33100038.
  53. Mahmoud AF, Ruckenstein MJ. Speech perception performance as a function of age at implantation among postlingually deaf adult cochlear implant recipients. Otol Neurotol. 2014;35(10):e286-e91. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000581. PMID: 25226375.
  54. Francis HW, Chee N, Yeagle J, Cheng A, Niparko JK. Impact of cochlear implants on the functional health status of older adults. Laryngoscope. 2002;112(8 Pt 1):1482-8. doi: 10.1097/00005537-200208000-00028. PMID: 12172266.
  55. Djalilian HR, King TA, Smith SL, Levine SC. Cochlear implantation in the elderly: results and quality-of-life assessment. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2002;111(10):890-5. doi: 10.1177/000348940211101005. PMID: 12389856.
  56. Hirschfelder A, Grabel S, Olze H. The impact of cochlear implantation on quality of life: the role of audiologic performance and variables. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;138(3):357-62. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2007.10.019. PMID: 18312885.
  57. Capretta NR, Moberly AC. Does quality of life depend on speech recognition performance for adult cochlear implant users? Laryngoscope. 2016;126(3):699-706. doi: 10.1002/lary.25525. PMID: 26256441.
  58. Friedland DR, Runge-Samuelson C, Baig H, Jensen J. Case-control analysis of cochlear implant performance in elderly patients. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;136(5):432-8. doi: 10.1001/archoto.2010.57. PMID: 20479370.
  59. Leung J, Wang NY, Yeagle JD, Chinnici J, Bowditch S, Francis HW, et al. Predictive models for cochlear implantation in elderly candidates. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;131(12):1049-54. doi: 10.1001/archotol.131.12.1049. PMID: 16365217.
  60. Friedland DR, Venick HS, Niparko JK. Choice of ear for cochlear implantation: the effect of history and residual hearing on predicted postoperative performance. Otol Neurotol. 2003;24(4):582-9. doi: 10.1097/00129492-200307000-00009. PMID: 12851549.
  61. James CJ, Graham PL, Betances Reinoso FA, Breuning SN, Durko M, Huarte Irujo A, et al. The Listening Network and Cochlear Implant Benefits in Hearing-Impaired Adults. Front Aging Neurosci. 2021;13:589296. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2021.589296. PMID: 33716706. PMCID: PMC7947658.
  62. Olze H, Szczepek AJ, Haupt H, Förster U, Zirke N, Gräbel S, et al. Cochlear implantation has a positive influence on quality of life, tinnitus, and psychological comorbidity. Laryngoscope. 2011;121(10):2220-7. doi: 10.1002/lary.22145. PMID: 21898434.
  63. le Roux T, Vinck B, Butler I, Louw L, Nauta L, Schlesinger D, et al. Predictors of health-related quality of life in adult cochlear implant recipients in South Africa. Int J Audiol. 2017;56(1):16-23. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2016.1227482. PMID: 27609548.
  64. Hawthorne G, Hogan A, Giles E, Stewart M, Kethel L, White K, et al. Evaluating the health-related quality of life effects of cochlear implants: a prospective study of an adult cochlear implant program. Int J Audiol. 2004;43(4):183-92. doi: 10.1080/14992020400050026. PMID: 15250122.
  65. Aguiar RGR, de Almeida K, de Miranda-Gonsalez EC. Test-Retest Reliability of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) in Brazilian Portuguese. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019;23(04):e380-e3. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1677754. PMID: 31649755. PMCID: PMC6805206.
  66. Moulin A, Richard C. Sources of variability of speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ) scores in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired populations. Int J Audiol. 2016;55(2):101-9. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1104734. PMID: 26624277.
  67. Assouly KK, Arts RA, Graham PL, van Dijk B, James CJ. Influence of tinnitus annoyance on hearing-related quality of life in cochlear implant recipients. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):1-11. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-18823-3. PMID: 36002556. PMCID: PMC9402917.
  68. Quaranta N, Wagstaff S, Baguley DM. Tinnitus and cochlear implantation. Int J Audiol. 2004;43(5):245-51. doi: 10.1080/14992020400050033. PMID: 15357407.
  69. Di Nardo W, Cantore I, Cianfrone F, Melillo P, Scorpecci A, Paludetti G. Tinnitus modifications after cochlear implantation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2007;264(10):1145-9. doi: 10.1007/s00405-007-0352-7. PMID: 17558507.
  70. Borges ALF, Duarte P, Almeida RBS, Ledesma ALL, Azevedo YJ, Pereira LV, et al. Cochlear implant and tinnitus-a meta-analysis. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2021;87(3):353-65. doi: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.11.006. PMID: 33342697. PMCID: PMC9422519.
  71. Tolisano AM, Schauwecker N, Baumgart B, Whitson J, Kutz JW, Jr., Isaacson B, et al. Identifying Disadvantaged Groups for Cochlear Implantation: Demographics from a Large Cochlear Implant Program. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2020;129(4):347-54. doi: 10.1177/0003489419888232. PMID: 31735055.
  72. Appelbaum EN, Yoo SS, Perera RA, Coelho DH. Duration of eligibility prior to cochlear implantation: have we made any progress? Otol Neurotol. 2017;38(9):1273-7. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001544. PMID: 28796093.
  73. Sorkin DL. Cochlear implantation in the world's largest medical device market: utilization and awareness of cochlear implants in the United States. Cochlear Implants Int. 2013;14 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S4-12. doi: 10.1179/1467010013z.00000000076. PMID: 23453146. PMCID: PMC3663290.
  74. Raine C. Cochlear implants in the United Kingdom: awareness and utilization. Cochlear Implants Int. 2013;14 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S32-7. doi: 10.1179/1467010013Z.00000000077. PMID: 23453150. PMCID: PMC3663289.
  75. Raine C, Atkinson H, Strachan DR, Martin JM. Access to cochlear implants: Time to reflect. Cochlear Implants Int. 2016;17 Suppl 1(sup1):42-6. doi: 10.1080/14670100.2016.1155808. PMID: 27099110.

 

 

Journal of Health Sciences & Surveillance System
Volume 12, Issue 2
April 2024
Pages 202-211
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics