Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34825919›Full record

ArticleHNO2022

[Teletherapy after cochlear implantation during the COVID-19 pandemic].

Christiane Völter, Carolin Stöckmann, Hannah Klein, Stefan Dazert, Jan Peter Thomas

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in HNO, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christiane VölterKlinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, St. Elisabeth-Hospital, Bleichstraße 15, 44787, Bochum, Deutschland. christiane.voelter@rub.de.
Carolin StöckmannKlinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, St. Elisabeth-Hospital, Bleichstraße 15, 44787, Bochum, Deutschland.
Hannah KleinKlinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, St. Elisabeth-Hospital, Bleichstraße 15, 44787, Bochum, Deutschland.
Stefan DazertKlinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, St. Elisabeth-Hospital, Bleichstraße 15, 44787, Bochum, Deutschland.
Jan Peter ThomasKlinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Kath. St. Paulus Gesellschaft, St. Johannes Hospital Dortmund, Johannesstr. 9-17, 44137, Dortmund, Deutschland.
Ruhr University Bochum · DESt. Elisabeth-Hospital Bochum · DESt.-Johannes-Hospital Dortmund · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the COVID-19 pandemic, digitalization in healthcare grew rapidly. Auditory training after cochlear implantation usually takes place face-to-face but social distancing interferes with this therapeutic approach. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn follow-up treatment, 42 adult cochlear implant (CI) users aged 53.8 (±15.6) years received video therapy 1 x/week for 5 weeks on a certified platform. After each therapy session, the technical process and therapeutic content were assessed. At the end of the study, usability and the relationship between therapist and patient were evaluated by patients and therapists using the System Usability Scale (SUS), a final questionnaire and by the Skala Therapeutische Allianz - Revised (STA-R). Furthermore, a cost-benefit analysis was done.

resultsUsability for both users was high (87.97 versus 93.0). Despite the lack of personal contact, therapeutic alliance was highly appreciated by patients and therapists (87.8% versus 84.8%). The main advantages for the patients were reductions in time and costs. In contrast, the rehabilitation center faced higher costs initially due to the longer time therapists needed to prepare the lessons. Technical problems had to be solved in > 75% of the first sessions but did not bother training thereafter. In total, 47.6% of the patients believe that teletherapy can completely fulfill their therapeutic needs.

conclusionVideo therapy has been judged as a useful tool by all users and the majority wants to continue. However, it remains questionable whether the therapist-patient relationship can be sufficiently maintained over a longer period and whether online therapy is as effective as face-to-face therapy.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsCOVID-19AdultHumansMiddle AgedPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Auditory rehabilitationCochlear implantationTherapeutic allianceUsabilityVideo therapy

Identifiers

PMID34825919
PMCPMC8620318
OpenAlexW3214985841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.