» Articles » PMID: 27567995

Cochlear Implants in Subjects Over Age 65: Quality of Life and Audiological Outcomes

Overview
Journal Med Sci Monit
Date 2016 Aug 29
PMID 27567995
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

BACKGROUND Cochlear implants (CIs) have been recognized as a safe and effective means for profound hearing loss rehabilitation in children and adults and recently their use has been extended to subjects over 65 years of age. The aim of this paper was to assess indices related to changes in the quality of life (QoL) in elderly CI recipients. MATERIAL AND METHODS A case-control paradigm was used to assess the effects of CIs on the QoL. Forty-two subjects were assigned to the Case group and 15 subjects to the Control group. All 57 subjects were affected by profound hearing loss and had received a CI. Audiological data were collected from both groups at: (i) 1 month pre-implantation [T1]; (ii) 1 day pre- implantation [T2]; (iii) 30 days post-implantation, with CI used in free field [T3]; and (iv) 12 months post-implantation, with CI used in a free field [T4]. The QoL was assessed via a Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire, adapted to otolaryngology. To compare subjects across different ages with varying degrees of speech development, a perception parameter was used from the Speech Perception Categories test developed by Geers and Moog. RESULTS Hearing performance was considerably improved after CI. In relation to the hearing performance at time T1, statistically significant threshold gains were observed in both groups in the T3 and T4 observation windows. At time T4, a threshold gain of 70 dB HL in the Case group and a gain of 84 dB HL in the Control group were observed. With speech therapy rehabilitation, a perception level of 6 was reached by 80.0% of patients in the Case group and by 100% of patients in the Control group. In terms of QoL, both groups showed improved post-CI scores. Statistical differences were observed between the 2 groups, with the Control group outperforming the Case group in all but the social section. CONCLUSIONS Despite age-related changes in auditory system and prolonged hearing deprivation, CIs offer audiological and QoL benefits in the elderly.

Citing Articles

Cochlear implantation and cognitive function in the older adult population: current state of the art and future perspectives.

Vandenbroeke T, Andries E, Lammers M, Hofkens-Van den Brandt A, Mertens G, Van Rompaey V Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2025; 91(3):101544.

PMID: 39879878 PMC: 11803144. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2024.101544.


Evaluation of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire in Danish.

Neumann C, Schmidt J Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2025; 29(1):1-8.

PMID: 39845141 PMC: 11753863. DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1788598.


Cognitive Changes Up to 4 Years After Cochlear Implantation in Older Adults: A Prospective Longitudinal Study Using the RBANS-H.

Vandenbroeke T, Andries E, Lammers M, Van de Heyning P, Hofkens-Van den Brandt A, Vanderveken O Ear Hear. 2024; 46(2):361-370.

PMID: 39228026 PMC: 11825490. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001583.


Cochlear implant therapy improves the quality of life and social participation in the elderly: a prospective long-term evaluation.

Issing C, Loth A, Sakmen K, Guchlerner L, Helbig S, Baumann U Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024; 281(7):3453-3460.

PMID: 38353767 PMC: 11211127. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-023-08443-6.


Preliminary Evidence to Support a De-Escalated Cochlear Implant Programming Paradigm for New Adult Recipients: A Systematic Review.

Dornhoffer J, Khandalavala K, Zwolan T, Carlson M J Clin Med. 2023; 12(18).

PMID: 37762717 PMC: 10532146. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12185774.


References
1.
Labadie R, Carrasco V, Gilmer C, Pillsbury 3rd H . Cochlear implant performance in senior citizens. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000; 123(4):419-24. DOI: 10.1067/mhn.2000.109759. View

2.
Soda-Merhy A, Gonzalez-Valenzuela L, Tirado-Gutierrez C . Residual hearing preservation after cochlear implantation: comparison between straight and perimodiolar implants. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008; 139(3):399-404. DOI: 10.1016/j.otohns.2008.06.006. View

3.
Roth T, Hanebuth D, Probst R . Prevalence of age-related hearing loss in Europe: a review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011; 268(8):1101-1107. PMC: 3132411. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-011-1597-8. View

4.
Gottermeier L, De Filippo C, Block M . Loudness judgment procedures for evaluating hearing aid preselection decisions for severely and profoundly hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear. 1991; 12(4):261-7. DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199108000-00005. View

5.
Walling A, Dickson G . Hearing loss in older adults. Am Fam Physician. 2012; 85(12):1150-6. View