Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40456899›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 Surgery2025

Impact of cochlear implant indications on outcome, assessed and reported using the international classification of functioning, disability and health model.

Ellen Andries, Artur Lorens, Piotr Henryk Skarżyński, Henryk Skarżyński, Miryam Calvino, Javier Gavilán, Luis Lassaletta, Dayse Tavora-Vieira, Aanand Acharya, Anja Kurz and 7 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04611555 (Implementation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Model in Cochlear Implant Recipients), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT04611555 unknown statusnot on this map

Implementation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Model in Cochlear Implant Recipients: a Multi-center Prospective Follow-up Cohort Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversity Hospital, AntwerpRan2020 to 2022Enrolled100ConditionsHearing Loss
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Mumps-Induced Single-Sided Deafness: A Retrospective Analysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026
    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

17 authors.

Ellen AndriesDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Antwerp, Belgium. ellen.andries@uza.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7991-1322
Artur LorensWorld Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Warsaw/Kajetany, Poland.
Piotr Henryk SkarżyńskiWorld Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Warsaw/Kajetany, Poland.
Henryk SkarżyńskiWorld Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Warsaw/Kajetany, Poland.
Miryam CalvinoDepartment of Otolaryngology, La Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ Institute for Health Research, Madrid, Spain.
Javier GavilánDepartment of Otolaryngology, La Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ Institute for Health Research, Madrid, Spain.
Luis LassalettaDepartment of Otolaryngology, La Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ Institute for Health Research, Madrid, Spain.
Dayse Tavora-VieiraDepartment of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, Fiona Stanley Fremantle Hospital Group, Perth, Australia.
Aanand AcharyaDepartment of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, Fiona Stanley Fremantle Hospital Group, Perth, Australia.
Anja KurzDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Head and Neck Surgery, Comprehensive Hearing Center, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Rudolf HagenDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Head and Neck Surgery, Comprehensive Hearing Center, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Ilona AndersonClinical Research Department, MED-EL GmbH, Innsbruck, Austria.
Karin KoinigClinical Research Department, MED-EL GmbH, Innsbruck, Austria.
Yassin AbdelsamadResearch Department, MED-EL GmbH, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Paul Van de HeyningDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Antwerp, Belgium.
Vincent Van RompaeyDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Antwerp, Belgium.
Griet MertensDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Antwerp, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the impact of various Cochlear Implant (CI) indications on outcomes assessed using the International Classification of Functioning, disability and health (ICF)-based CI outcome assessment (CI-ICF) protocol.

methodsData from a multicenter longitudinal cohort study was analyzed. A consecutive sample of adult CI users (N = 72), including unilateral (n = 22), bilateral (n = 2), electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) (n = 6), single-sided deafness (SSD) (n = 6), and bimodal (n = 36) CI users, were enrolled based on clinical indications for cochlear implantation. Participants were assessed preoperatively and six months postoperatively using the CI-ICF protocol, which comprises patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pure tone and speech audiometry and localization tests.

resultsAll CI indication groups showed benefits across most PROMs, pure tone and speech audiometry and localization. Differences were mainly observed in participants with SSD, who showed better baseline auditory abilities and less postoperative improvement compared to other groups for sound detection (PTA4) [e.g. PTA4 difference over time: SSD versus unilateral CI (p = 0.003)] and listening (HISQUI19) [e.g. HISQUI19 difference over time: SSD versus bimodal (p = 0.039)]. Participants with bimodal stimulation or SSD generally exhibited superior speech discrimination in noise abilities pre- and postoperatively, and demonstrated an equivalent amount of improvement for this category compared to EAS and unilateral CI users.

conclusionVarious CI indication groups experienced improvements following cochlear implantation, highlighting its broad efficacy. Personalized CI strategies are essential to maximize individual outcomes. These findings support the comprehensive and readily interpretable assessment framework provided by the CI-ICF protocol in evaluating CI outcomes.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov (NCT04611555), retrospectively registered on 2-Nov-2020.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsDeafnessAdultAgedAudiometry, Pure-ToneAudiometry, SpeechFemaleHumansInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresTreatment OutcomeCI indicationsCI outcome evaluationCI outcomesCochlear ImplantICF

Identifiers

PMID40456899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.