Ear Science Institute Australia, Subiaco, Australia.
Ear Sciences Centre, School of Medicine, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Australia.
Ear Hear. 2020 Nov/Dec;41(6):1752-1763. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000895.
To explore the factors influencing the uptake of cochlear implants in adults, determine the impact of each factor, and to conceptualize the journey to implantation from a multistakeholder perspective.
Concept mapping was used to integrate input from multiple stakeholders, each with their own experience and expertise. This mixed participatory method collects qualitative and quantitative data collection and enables further quantitative analysis. There were two participant cohorts: clients (cochlear implant recipients, candidates, and family members) and professionals (cochlear implant audiologists, ear, nose, and throat surgeons, administration staff, managers. and manufacturer representatives). A total of 93 people participated in the study: client cohort (n = 60, M age = 66.60 years) and professional cohort (n = 33, M age = 45.24 years). Participants brainstormed statements in response to the question "What influences people's decision to get/not get a cochlear implant?" They subsequently grouped the statements and named each group. They rated each statement as to its impact on the decision and prioritized the need for each to be changed/improved using a five-point Likert scale. Multidimensional scaling was used to produce a visual representation of the ideas and their relationship in the form of concepts. Further analysis was conducted to determine the differences between the cohorts, subcohorts, and concepts.
One hundred ten unique statements were generated and grouped into six concepts which either directly affected the client or their environment. These concepts were: external influences (awareness and attitude of non-implant professionals about uptake, cost, logistics, the referral pathway, public awareness); uncertainties, beliefs, and fears (fears, negative effect of word of mouth, unsuccessful previous ear surgery, cosmetics of the device, misunderstanding of how a cochlear implant functions, eligibility for an implant and outcomes after implantation); health problems (mental and physical health); hearing difficulties (social, emotional, and communication impacts of hearing loss, severity of hearing loss, benefit from and experience with hearing aids); implant professionals (implant team's attitude, knowledge and relationship with clients, quality of overall service); and goals and support (clients 'hearing desires and goals, motivation, positive impact of word of mouth, family support, having a cochlear implant mentor. The six concepts fell into two overarching domains: the client-driven domain with four concepts and the external domain with two concepts. The mean rating of concepts in terms of impact on a client's decision to get an implant ranged from 2.24 (external influences, the main barrier) to 4.45 (goals and support, the main driver). Ratings significantly differed between the client and professional cohorts.
This study increases our understanding of the factors, which influence a client's decision choose a cochlear implant as a hearing treatment. It also provides new information on the influence of the other stakeholders on the client journey. The magnitude of the generated statements in the client-driven domain highlights the pivotal role of individualized care in clinical settings in influencing a client's decision and the need for the professionals to understand a client's needs and expectations. A client's persistent hearing difficulties, goals, and support network were identified as drivers to the uptake of cochlear implants. However, the barriers identified highlight the need for a collaborative multi- and interdisciplinary approach to raise awareness in and educate non-implant hearing professionals about the cochlear implant process, as well as providing information to empower clients to make educated decisions and consider a cochlear implant as a hearing management option.
探索影响成人接受人工耳蜗植入的因素,确定每个因素的影响,并从多利益相关者的角度来概念化植入的过程。
使用概念映射将来自多个利益相关者的意见结合起来,每个利益相关者都有自己的经验和专业知识。这种混合式参与性方法收集定性和定量数据,并允许进一步进行定量分析。有两个参与者队列:客户(人工耳蜗植入者、候选人和家属)和专业人员(人工耳蜗植入听力学家、耳鼻喉科医生、行政人员、管理人员和制造商代表)。共有 93 人参与了这项研究:客户队列(n=60,M 年龄=66.60 岁)和专业人员队列(n=33,M 年龄=45.24 岁)。参与者针对“是什么影响人们决定是否接受人工耳蜗植入?”这一问题提出了陈述。随后,他们将陈述分组并为每个组命名。他们根据对决策的影响程度对每个陈述进行了评分,并使用五点李克特量表对每个陈述的优先级进行了排序,以确定需要改变/改进的程度。多维标度用于以概念的形式生成想法及其关系的可视化表示。进一步的分析用于确定队列、子队列和概念之间的差异。
共生成了 110 个独特的陈述,并将其分为六个概念,这些概念直接影响客户或其环境。这些概念是:外部影响(非植入专业人士对人工耳蜗植入的接受程度、成本、后勤、转诊途径、公众意识的意识和态度);不确定性、信念和恐惧(恐惧、负面的口碑影响、先前耳部手术的失败、设备的外观、对人工耳蜗植入功能的误解、植入的资格和植入后的结果);健康问题(心理健康和身体健康);听力困难(听力损失的社会、情感和沟通影响、听力损失的严重程度、助听器的益处和体验);植入专业人员(植入团队的态度、与客户的知识和关系、整体服务质量);以及目标和支持(客户的听力愿望和目标、动机、口碑的积极影响、家庭支持、有一位人工耳蜗植入导师)。这六个概念分为两个总体领域:以客户为驱动的领域有四个概念,外部领域有两个概念。概念对客户决定植入人工耳蜗的影响的平均评分范围从 2.24(外部影响,主要障碍)到 4.45(目标和支持,主要驱动力)。客户和专业人员队列之间的评分存在显著差异。
这项研究增加了我们对影响客户选择人工耳蜗作为听力治疗的因素的理解。它还提供了关于其他利益相关者对客户旅程影响的新信息。客户驱动领域生成的陈述的数量强调了在临床环境中提供个性化护理对影响客户决策的关键作用,以及专业人员了解客户需求和期望的必要性。客户持续的听力困难、目标和支持网络被确定为人工耳蜗植入的驱动力。然而,确定的障碍突出表明,需要采取协作的多学科和跨学科方法来提高非植入听力专业人员对人工耳蜗植入过程的认识,并提供信息,使客户能够做出明智的决策,并考虑将人工耳蜗植入作为听力管理的选择。