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 Surgery2024
Comparison of hearing performance in patients with borderline indication for active middle ear or cochlear implants: clinical outcomes to guide preoperative counseling and decision making.
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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Health-related quality of life in vibrant soundbridge patients: generic and specific measures, short-term and long-term outcomes.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 · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the presented study was to compare the audiological benefit achieved in cochlear implant (CI) patients who, in principle, could still have been treated with an active middle ear implant (AMEI) with a group of AMEI users.
methodsResults of 20 CI patients with a pure-tone average (PTA) of 70 dB HL prior to surgery were compared with a group of 12 subjects treated with a Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB). Pre-surgical comparison included PTA for air conduction and bone conduction, maximum speech recognition score for monosyllabic words (WRSmax), and aided monosyllabic word recognition at 65 dB SPL. One year after surgery, aided monosyllabic speech recognition score at 65 dB SPL was compared.
resultsMean PTA for air conduction in the VSB group was significantly lower than in the CI group (4.8 dB, Z = - 2.011, p < 0.05). Mean PTA for bone conduction in the VSB group was also significantly lower than in the CI group (23.4 dB, Z = - 4.673, p < 0.001). WRSmax in the VSB group was significantly better than in the CI group (40.7%, Z = - 3.705, p < 0.001). One year after treatment, there was no significant difference in aided speech perception in quiet between both subject groups.
conclusionComparison of the two methods showed equivalent results for both treatments in subjects with a borderline indication. Not only pure-tone audiometry results but, particularly, speech perception scores pre-surgery should be taken into account in preoperative counseling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.