Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31776734›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2020

Cochlear implantation in adults with single-sided deafness: generic and disease-specific long-term quality of life.

Franz Muigg, Harald R Bliem, Heike Kühn, Josef Seebacher, Bernhard Holzner, Viktor W Weichbold

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Cost-utility of cochlear implantation in single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss: results of a randomized controlled trial.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Franz MuiggDepartment for Hearing Speech and Voice Disorders, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. franz.muigg@tirol-kliniken.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3531-1549
Harald R BliemDepartment of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Heike KühnComprehensive Hearing Center, ENT University Clinic, Würzburg, Germany.
Josef SeebacherDepartment for Hearing Speech and Voice Disorders, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Bernhard HolznerUniversity Hospital of Psychiatry I, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Viktor W WeichboldDepartment for Hearing Speech and Voice Disorders, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine the 2-year outcome of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adults who received a cochlear implant (CI) for single-sided deafness (SSD).

methodsTwenty adults (mean age at implantation: 47 ± 11 years) with SSD (PTA worse ear: 113 dB HL, PTA better ear: 14 dB HL) were administered the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ), and the Health Utility Index 3 (HUI 3). Questionnaire administration occurred before cochlear implantation and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after implant activation.

resultsOf the 20 patients, 2 discontinued CI use within the observation period due to poor benefit. The NCIQ total score of the sample increased significantly over time (p = 0.003). The largest increase occurred within the first 3 months of CI use. Also, the HUI 3 multi-attribute utility score increased significantly (p = 0.03). The post-treatment increase of this score (+ 0.11 points) indicated that the gain in HRQoL was clinically relevant. Patients with a duration of deafness > 10 years had in all measures an equal HRQoL improvement than had patients with a duration of deafness < 10 years.

conclusionCochlear implantation led to significant improvement of hearing-specific and generic HRQoL in our patients. The improvement was seen after 3 or 6 months but did not increase further at later intervals. Patients with long-lasting SSD may be at higher risk of discontinuing CI use. However, if they adapt to the CI, they can experience an equal increase of HRQoL as patients with a short duration of SSD.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationDeafnessHearing Loss, UnilateralQuality of LifeAdultCochlear ImplantsFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSpeech PerceptionTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeCochlear implantDuration of deafnessHealth-related quality of lifeSingle-sided deafness

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.