ArticleThe Laryngoscope2026
Evaluation of a De-Escalated Post-Operative Cochlear Implant Programming Protocol.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2026. 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.
- Evaluation of a De-Escalated Post-Operative Cochlear Implant Programming Protocol.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
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
objectiveCochlear implantation often requires frequent post-operative programming visits which can disrupt daily life, impose financial burdens, and delay access for new cochlear implant (CI) candidates. This study evaluated the feasibility of a de-escalated schedule of four programming appointments within the first year after surgery.
methodsA retrospective review was completed for 236 patients aged 0-100 years who received CI from July 2022 to December 2023. Explants, reimplants and second CI within the study window were excluded. Collected data included demographics, schedule adherence, additional visit reason, and Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word scores for adults.
resultsA total of 201 CI recipients (mean age 46.9 years; 72.6% adults) met inclusion criteria. Most were male (53%), White (88%), Non-Hispanic (54.7%), and privately insured (56.2%). Overall, 53% adhered to the 4-visit protocol, 35% required 1-2 additional visits, and 12% required 3-6. Among those requiring additional appointments (n = 95), 28.4% followed the prior protocol of up to 10+ visits. Adherence to the new streamlined protocol improved by 43% over the study period. On multivariate analysis, each additional year of age at surgery reduced the odds of adherence by 3.4% (p < 0.05). No statistical or clinical differences were observed in 12-month CNC scores between patients with ≤ 4 versus > 4 visits.
conclusionsA de-escalated post-CI programming schedule of four visits in the first year is feasible and does not compromise adult speech perception outcomes. Older patients may require closer follow-up. Successful implementation may require time for workflows and provider adoption. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.