Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2024; 28(02): e263-e277
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1776721
Original Research

Late Bilateral Sequential Cochlear Implant and Quality of Life

Larissa Claret De Lima Mendes 
1   Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of the Universidade de Brasília, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brazil
,
Alda Borges 
2   Department of Health Sciences, University of Brasilia, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Brasília, DF, Brazil
,
Fernanda Caldas 
3   Department of Health Sciences, University of Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brazil
,
Juliano Passos Barbosa
4   Department of Medicine, Centro Universitário do Planalto Central Apparecido dos Santos, Brasília, DF, Brazil
,
Fayez Bahmad Jr 
5   Health Sciences School, Universidade de Brasília, Brasilia, DF, Brazil
› Author Affiliations Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Hearing impairment is one of the main disorders that can interfere with the development of speech and language. In an individual, it can cause significant communication difficulties, social isolation, negative feelings, and depressive disorders. The hearing aids (HAs) and cochlear implant (CI) are options for profound and severe hearing loss, and the CI can be indicated for individuals who do not obtain benefits from HAs.

Objective To evaluate the quality of life of individuals who underwent sequential bilateral CIs with a long surgical interval between procedures.

Methods Fifteen patients, aged 8 to 70 years old, who underwent sequential bilateral CI, with an interval ≥ 4 years between surgeries, were evaluated. Quality of life was evaluated using three questionnaires: WHOQOL-BREF, SSQ-12 and HHIA in Portuguese.

Results The WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire showed that the study participants had a good quality of life in all domains assessed. According to the SSQ-12, few reported inability to listen in communication situations. Most individuals were classified as having medium disability by the HHIA, but the social and emotional effects did not significantly affect the quality of life.

Conclusion The use of questionnaires to assess the quality of life of patients with hearing impairment is a valuable tool to measure adaptation to CI. Patients undergoing bilateral sequential CI, even with a long interval between procedures, presented high indices of quality of life.

Keywords

quality of life - cochlear implant - hearing loss - questionnaire


Publication History

Received: 21 November 2022

Accepted: 14 July 2023

Article published online:
05 February 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs. Journal of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention 2019; 4 (02) 1-44
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Bevilacqua MC, Costa OA, Martinho ACF. Implante Coclear. In: Ferreira LP, Befi- Lopes DM, Limongi SCO. (org.). Tratado de Fonoaudiologia. São Paulo: Roca; 2005: 751-761
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Brown KD, Balkany TJ. Benefits of bilateral cochlear implantation: a review. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007; 15 (05) 315-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Litovsky R, Parkinson A, Arcaroli J, Sammeth C. Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a multicenter clinical study. Ear Hear 2006; b 27 (06) 714-731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Moret ALM. Percepção auditiva da fala em crianças e adolescentes com implante coclear bilateral sequencial. Tese (Livre-Docência) – Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru. Universidade de São Paulo; . Bauru, 2016; 80
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Seidl EMF, Zannon CML. Qualidade de vida e saúde: aspectos conceituais e metodológicos. Cad Saude Publica 2004; 20 (02) 580-588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Almeida K. Avaliação objetiva e subjetiva do benefício de próteses auditivas em adultos [tese]. São Paulo (SP): Universidade Federal de São Paulo – Escola Paulista de Medicina; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Newman CW, Weinstein BE, Jacobson GP, Hug GA. The Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults: psychometric adequacy and audiometric correlates. Ear Hear 1990; 11 (06) 430-433
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Gatehouse S, Noble W. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 2004; 43 (02) 85-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Noble W, Jensen NS, Naylor G, Bhullar N, Akeroyd MA. A short form of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale suitable for clinical use: the SSQ12. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (06) 409-412
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Akeroyd MA, Guy FH, Harrison DL, Suller SL. A factor analysis of the SSQ (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale). Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (02) 101-114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 The WHOQOL Group. The development of the World Health Organization quality of life assessment instrument (the WHOQOL). In: Orley J, Kuyken W. editors. Quality of life assessment: international perspectives. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 1994: 41-60
    Google Scholar
  • 13 The WHOQOL Group. The world health organization quality of life assessment: position paper from the world health organization. 1995 41. 1403-1409
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fleck MPA, Lela OF, Louzada S. et al. Desenvolvimento da versão em português do instrumento de avaliação de qualidade de vida da OMS (WHOQOL-100). Rev Bras Psiq. 1999; 21 (01) 19-28
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Fleck MPA, Louzada S, Xavier M. et al. Aplicação da versão em português do instrumento abreviado de avaliação da qualidade de vida “WHOQOL-bref”. Rev Saude Publica 2000; 34 (02) 178-183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Skevington SM, Lotfy M, O'Connell KA. WHOQOL Group. The World Health Organization's WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Qual Life Res 2004; 13 (02) 299-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Leung J, Wang NY, Yeagle JD. et al. Predictive models for cochlear implantation in elderly candidates. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005; 131 (12) 1049-1054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Coelho DH, Hammerschlag PE, Bat-Chava Y, Kohan D. Psychometric validity of the Cochlear Implant Function Index (CIFI): a quality of life assessment tool for adult cochlear implant users. Cochlear Implants Int 2009; 10 (02) 70-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Noble W, Tyler RS, Dunn CC, Bhullar N. Younger- and older-age adults with unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants: speech and spatial hearing self-ratings and performance. Otol Neurotol 2009; 30 (07) 921-929
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nelson PB, Jin SH. Factors affecting speech understanding in gated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2004; 115 (5 Pt 1): 2286-2294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Galvin KL, Mok M, Dowell RC, Briggs RJ. 12-month post-operative results for older children using sequential bilateral implants. Ear Hear 2007; 28 (2, Suppl) 19S-21S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Smulders YE, Rinia AB, Rovers MM, van Zanten GA, Grolman W. What is the effect of time between sequential cochlear implantations on hearing in adults and children? A systematic review of the literature. Laryngoscope 2011; 121 (09) 1942-1949
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Friedmann DR, Green J, Fang Y, Ensor K, Roland JT, Waltzman SB. Sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in the adolescent population. Laryngoscope 2015; 125 (08) 1952-1958
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Sparreboom M, Snik AF, Mylanus EA. Sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children: quality of life. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 138 (02) 134-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Sivonen V, Sinkkonen ST, Willberg T. et al. Improvements in Hearing and in Quality of Life after Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in a Consecutive Sample of Adult Patients with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss. J Clin Med 2021; 10 (11) 2394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Sood R, Varshney S, Gupta K, Devi NS, Kumar N, Tyagi AK. et al The Impact of Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss on Quality of Life of Sub-Himalayan Population. Int Otolaryngol 2022; 1687-9201
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Clopton BM, Spelman FA. Technology and the future of cochlear implants. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 2003; 191: 26-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Skinner MW. Optimizing cochlear implant speech performance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 2003; 191: 4-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar