Eric E Babajanian, Meghan M Cervantes, Steven A Gordon, Kathryn M Johnson, Mary Leigh Horn, Neil S Patel, Richard K Gurgel
{"title":"了解患者使用人工耳蜗处理器的模式。","authors":"Eric E Babajanian, Meghan M Cervantes, Steven A Gordon, Kathryn M Johnson, Mary Leigh Horn, Neil S Patel, Richard K Gurgel","doi":"10.1177/00034894241234589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the extent of benefit the second processor provides and to better understand utilization patterns regarding cochlear implant (CI) sound processors.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Institutional contracts determine the external CI sound processor hardware that a patient is eligible for. Despite the high prevalence of CI worldwide, there is a paucity in the literature regarding patient preferences and how patients utilize provided external hardware.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A close-ended, multiple-choice survey was mailed to all patients over the age of 18 years who underwent CI between 2016 to 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients who received their CI hardware prior to 2018 were provided 2 processors, whereas those who received their hardware in 2018 or later were provided 1 processor.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 100/263 surveys were returned for a response rate of 38.0%. Of the cohort with 1 processor, 31.3% experienced a period without a functioning processor and access to sound compared to 5.6% of the cohort with 2 processors (<i>P</i> = -.003). Of the cohort with 2 processors, 24.3% noted that they often or always utilize their second processor. When asked how important having a second processor was, 62.9% of the 2-processor group responded that it was very important (<i>P</i> = .001). The most common reason for utilizing the second processor was a damaged primary processor. Patients who received 2 processors had a significantly lower number of postoperative audiology clinic visits for device troubleshooting (<i>P</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients who have 2 CI external processors identify this as being very important to them and experience significantly less time without access to sound due to lack of a functioning processor. As institutional contracts often dictate whether a patient will receive 1 or 2 sound processors with their CI hardware, it is important to understand patient preferences and utilization patterns in order to guide patient-centric policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50975,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Otology Rhinology and Laryngology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding Patient Utilization Patterns of Cochlear Implant Processors.\",\"authors\":\"Eric E Babajanian, Meghan M Cervantes, Steven A Gordon, Kathryn M Johnson, Mary Leigh Horn, Neil S Patel, Richard K Gurgel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00034894241234589\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the extent of benefit the second processor provides and to better understand utilization patterns regarding cochlear implant (CI) sound processors.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Institutional contracts determine the external CI sound processor hardware that a patient is eligible for. Despite the high prevalence of CI worldwide, there is a paucity in the literature regarding patient preferences and how patients utilize provided external hardware.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A close-ended, multiple-choice survey was mailed to all patients over the age of 18 years who underwent CI between 2016 to 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients who received their CI hardware prior to 2018 were provided 2 processors, whereas those who received their hardware in 2018 or later were provided 1 processor.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 100/263 surveys were returned for a response rate of 38.0%. Of the cohort with 1 processor, 31.3% experienced a period without a functioning processor and access to sound compared to 5.6% of the cohort with 2 processors (<i>P</i> = -.003). Of the cohort with 2 processors, 24.3% noted that they often or always utilize their second processor. When asked how important having a second processor was, 62.9% of the 2-processor group responded that it was very important (<i>P</i> = .001). The most common reason for utilizing the second processor was a damaged primary processor. Patients who received 2 processors had a significantly lower number of postoperative audiology clinic visits for device troubleshooting (<i>P</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients who have 2 CI external processors identify this as being very important to them and experience significantly less time without access to sound due to lack of a functioning processor. As institutional contracts often dictate whether a patient will receive 1 or 2 sound processors with their CI hardware, it is important to understand patient preferences and utilization patterns in order to guide patient-centric policies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Otology Rhinology and Laryngology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Otology Rhinology and Laryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00034894241234589\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Otology Rhinology and Laryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00034894241234589","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的评估第二台处理器带来的益处,更好地了解人工耳蜗(CI)声音处理器的使用模式:背景:机构合同决定了患者有资格使用外部 CI 声音处理器硬件。背景:机构合同决定了患者是否有资格获得外部 CI 声音处理器硬件。尽管 CI 在全球的普及率很高,但有关患者偏好以及患者如何使用所提供的外部硬件的文献却很少:向一家三级学术医疗中心所有在 2016 年至 2020 年期间接受 CI 治疗的 18 岁以上患者邮寄了一份封闭式多选调查问卷。在 2018 年之前接受 CI 硬件的患者可获得 2 个处理器,而在 2018 年或之后接受硬件的患者可获得 1 个处理器:共收回 100/263 份调查问卷,回复率为 38.0%。在使用 1 个处理器的人群中,有 31.3% 的人在一段时间内无法正常使用处理器和访问声音,而在使用 2 个处理器的人群中,这一比例为 5.6%(P = -.003)。在拥有 2 个处理器的人群中,24.3% 的人表示他们经常或总是使用第二个处理器。当被问及拥有第二个处理器有多重要时,62.9% 的双处理器组回答非常重要(P = .001)。使用第二处理器最常见的原因是主处理器损坏。使用 2 个处理器的患者术后到听力学诊所进行设备故障诊断的次数明显减少(P 结论:使用 2 个处理器的患者术后到听力学诊所进行设备故障诊断的次数明显减少(P = 0.001):拥有 2 个 CI 外部处理器的患者认为这对他们非常重要,他们因缺少一个正常工作的处理器而无法获得声音的时间明显减少。由于机构合同通常会规定患者在使用 CI 硬件时会获得 1 个还是 2 个声音处理器,因此了解患者的偏好和使用模式对于制定以患者为中心的政策非常重要。
Understanding Patient Utilization Patterns of Cochlear Implant Processors.
Objective: To evaluate the extent of benefit the second processor provides and to better understand utilization patterns regarding cochlear implant (CI) sound processors.
Background: Institutional contracts determine the external CI sound processor hardware that a patient is eligible for. Despite the high prevalence of CI worldwide, there is a paucity in the literature regarding patient preferences and how patients utilize provided external hardware.
Methods: A close-ended, multiple-choice survey was mailed to all patients over the age of 18 years who underwent CI between 2016 to 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients who received their CI hardware prior to 2018 were provided 2 processors, whereas those who received their hardware in 2018 or later were provided 1 processor.
Results: A total of 100/263 surveys were returned for a response rate of 38.0%. Of the cohort with 1 processor, 31.3% experienced a period without a functioning processor and access to sound compared to 5.6% of the cohort with 2 processors (P = -.003). Of the cohort with 2 processors, 24.3% noted that they often or always utilize their second processor. When asked how important having a second processor was, 62.9% of the 2-processor group responded that it was very important (P = .001). The most common reason for utilizing the second processor was a damaged primary processor. Patients who received 2 processors had a significantly lower number of postoperative audiology clinic visits for device troubleshooting (P < .001).
Conclusion: Patients who have 2 CI external processors identify this as being very important to them and experience significantly less time without access to sound due to lack of a functioning processor. As institutional contracts often dictate whether a patient will receive 1 or 2 sound processors with their CI hardware, it is important to understand patient preferences and utilization patterns in order to guide patient-centric policies.
期刊介绍:
The Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology publishes original manuscripts of clinical and research importance in otolaryngology–head and neck medicine and surgery, otology, neurotology, bronchoesophagology, laryngology, rhinology, head and neck oncology and surgery, plastic and reconstructive surgery, pediatric otolaryngology, audiology, and speech pathology. In-depth studies (supplements), papers of historical interest, and reviews of computer software and applications in otolaryngology are also published, as well as imaging, pathology, and clinicopathology studies, book reviews, and letters to the editor. AOR is the official journal of the American Broncho-Esophagological Association.