Cargando…

Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten

BACKGROUND: Patients with a cochlear implant (CI) should be evaluated for a new speech processor every 6 years. The aim of this analysis was to assess the subjective and audiological benefit of upgrades. METHODS: Speech understanding and subjective benefit were analyzed in 99 patients with the old a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lailach, Susen, Lenz, Alexander, Zahnert, Thomas, Neudert, Marcus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Medizin 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10462568/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37540233
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00106-023-01341-7
_version_ 1785098061799751680
author Lailach, Susen
Lenz, Alexander
Zahnert, Thomas
Neudert, Marcus
author_facet Lailach, Susen
Lenz, Alexander
Zahnert, Thomas
Neudert, Marcus
author_sort Lailach, Susen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Patients with a cochlear implant (CI) should be evaluated for a new speech processor every 6 years. The aim of this analysis was to assess the subjective and audiological benefit of upgrades. METHODS: Speech understanding and subjective benefit were analyzed in 99 patients with the old and the new speech processor after 4 weeks of wearing. Speech understanding was assessed using the Freiburg monosyllabic test in quiet (FBE) at 65 dB and 80 dB, and the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) at 65 dB noise with adaptive speech sound level. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) was used to assess subjective hearing impairment, and the Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ) was used to assess subjective satisfaction. RESULTS: The speech processor upgrade resulted in a significant improvement of speech understanding in quiet at 65 dB (mean difference 8.9 ± 25.9 percentage points, p < 0.001) and 80 dB (mean difference 8.1 ± 29.7 percentage points, p < 0.001) and in noise (mean difference 3.2 ± 10.7 dB signal-to-noise ratio [S/N], p = 0.006). Using the APHAB, a significant improvement (mean difference 0.07 ± 0.16, p < 0.001) in hearing impairment was demonstrated in all listening situations. The APSQ showed significantly higher patient satisfaction with the new speech processor (mean difference 0.42 ± 1.26, p = 0.006). A comparative assessment of the benefit based on subjective and speech audiometric results identified a proportion of patients (35–42%) who subjectively benefited from the upgrade but had no measurable benefit based on speech audiometry. CONCLUSION: There was a significant improvement in audiologically measurable and subjectively reflected speech understanding and patient satisfaction after the upgrade. In patients with only a small improvement in audiologically measurable speech understanding, the subjective benefit should also be assessed with validated measurement instruments in order to justify an upgrade to the payers in the health sector.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10462568
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Medizin
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104625682023-08-30 Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten Lailach, Susen Lenz, Alexander Zahnert, Thomas Neudert, Marcus HNO Originalien BACKGROUND: Patients with a cochlear implant (CI) should be evaluated for a new speech processor every 6 years. The aim of this analysis was to assess the subjective and audiological benefit of upgrades. METHODS: Speech understanding and subjective benefit were analyzed in 99 patients with the old and the new speech processor after 4 weeks of wearing. Speech understanding was assessed using the Freiburg monosyllabic test in quiet (FBE) at 65 dB and 80 dB, and the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) at 65 dB noise with adaptive speech sound level. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) was used to assess subjective hearing impairment, and the Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ) was used to assess subjective satisfaction. RESULTS: The speech processor upgrade resulted in a significant improvement of speech understanding in quiet at 65 dB (mean difference 8.9 ± 25.9 percentage points, p < 0.001) and 80 dB (mean difference 8.1 ± 29.7 percentage points, p < 0.001) and in noise (mean difference 3.2 ± 10.7 dB signal-to-noise ratio [S/N], p = 0.006). Using the APHAB, a significant improvement (mean difference 0.07 ± 0.16, p < 0.001) in hearing impairment was demonstrated in all listening situations. The APSQ showed significantly higher patient satisfaction with the new speech processor (mean difference 0.42 ± 1.26, p = 0.006). A comparative assessment of the benefit based on subjective and speech audiometric results identified a proportion of patients (35–42%) who subjectively benefited from the upgrade but had no measurable benefit based on speech audiometry. CONCLUSION: There was a significant improvement in audiologically measurable and subjectively reflected speech understanding and patient satisfaction after the upgrade. In patients with only a small improvement in audiologically measurable speech understanding, the subjective benefit should also be assessed with validated measurement instruments in order to justify an upgrade to the payers in the health sector. Springer Medizin 2023-08-04 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10462568/ /pubmed/37540233 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00106-023-01341-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access Dieser Artikel wird unter der Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz veröffentlicht, welche die Nutzung, Vervielfältigung, Bearbeitung, Verbreitung und Wiedergabe in jeglichem Medium und Format erlaubt, sofern Sie den/die ursprünglichen Autor(en) und die Quelle ordnungsgemäß nennen, einen Link zur Creative Commons Lizenz beifügen und angeben, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden. Die in diesem Artikel enthaltenen Bilder und sonstiges Drittmaterial unterliegen ebenfalls der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz, sofern sich aus der Abbildungslegende nichts anderes ergibt. Sofern das betreffende Material nicht unter der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz steht und die betreffende Handlung nicht nach gesetzlichen Vorschriften erlaubt ist, ist für die oben aufgeführten Weiterverwendungen des Materials die Einwilligung des jeweiligen Rechteinhabers einzuholen. Weitere Details zur Lizenz entnehmen Sie bitte der Lizenzinformation auf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Originalien
Lailach, Susen
Lenz, Alexander
Zahnert, Thomas
Neudert, Marcus
Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten
title Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten
title_full Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten
title_fullStr Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten
title_full_unstemmed Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten
title_short Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten
title_sort wertigkeit von patient-reported outcome measures zur bewertung des versorgungsvorteils der sprachprozessorumversorgung bei patient/-innen mit cochleaimplantaten
topic Originalien
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10462568/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37540233
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00106-023-01341-7
work_keys_str_mv AT lailachsusen wertigkeitvonpatientreportedoutcomemeasureszurbewertungdesversorgungsvorteilsdersprachprozessorumversorgungbeipatientinnenmitcochleaimplantaten
AT lenzalexander wertigkeitvonpatientreportedoutcomemeasureszurbewertungdesversorgungsvorteilsdersprachprozessorumversorgungbeipatientinnenmitcochleaimplantaten
AT zahnertthomas wertigkeitvonpatientreportedoutcomemeasureszurbewertungdesversorgungsvorteilsdersprachprozessorumversorgungbeipatientinnenmitcochleaimplantaten
AT neudertmarcus wertigkeitvonpatientreportedoutcomemeasureszurbewertungdesversorgungsvorteilsdersprachprozessorumversorgungbeipatientinnenmitcochleaimplantaten