Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2024 May;133(5):532-537. doi: 10.1177/00034894241234589. Epub 2024 Feb 22.
To evaluate the extent of benefit the second processor provides and to better understand utilization patterns regarding cochlear implant (CI) sound processors.
Institutional contracts determine the external CI sound processor hardware that a patient is eligible for. Despite the high prevalence of CI worldwide, there is a paucity in the literature regarding patient preferences and how patients utilize provided external hardware.
A close-ended, multiple-choice survey was mailed to all patients over the age of 18 years who underwent CI between 2016 to 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients who received their CI hardware prior to 2018 were provided 2 processors, whereas those who received their hardware in 2018 or later were provided 1 processor.
A total of 100/263 surveys were returned for a response rate of 38.0%. Of the cohort with 1 processor, 31.3% experienced a period without a functioning processor and access to sound compared to 5.6% of the cohort with 2 processors ( = -.003). Of the cohort with 2 processors, 24.3% noted that they often or always utilize their second processor. When asked how important having a second processor was, 62.9% of the 2-processor group responded that it was very important ( = .001). The most common reason for utilizing the second processor was a damaged primary processor. Patients who received 2 processors had a significantly lower number of postoperative audiology clinic visits for device troubleshooting ( < .001).
Patients who have 2 CI external processors identify this as being very important to them and experience significantly less time without access to sound due to lack of a functioning processor. As institutional contracts often dictate whether a patient will receive 1 or 2 sound processors with their CI hardware, it is important to understand patient preferences and utilization patterns in order to guide patient-centric policies.
评估第二处理器的受益程度，并更好地了解人工耳蜗（CI）声音处理器的使用模式。
机构合同决定了患者有资格获得的外部 CI 声音处理器硬件。尽管全球范围内 CI 的患病率很高，但关于患者偏好以及患者如何使用提供的外部硬件的文献却很少。
向在一家三级学术医疗中心接受 2016 年至 2020 年间植入 CI 的所有 18 岁以上患者邮寄了一份封闭式、多项选择调查。2018 年前获得 CI 硬件的患者提供了 2 个处理器，而 2018 年或之后获得硬件的患者则提供了 1 个处理器。
共收回了 100/263 份调查，回复率为 38.0%。在只有 1 个处理器的队列中，31.3%的患者经历了一段时间没有功能处理器和声音的情况下，而在有 2 个处理器的队列中，这一比例为 5.6%（=-.003）。在有 2 个处理器的队列中，24.3%的患者表示他们经常或总是使用他们的第二个处理器。当被问及第二个处理器有多重要时，2 个处理器组的 62.9%的人回答说这非常重要（= 0.001）。使用第二个处理器的最常见原因是主处理器损坏。接受 2 个处理器的患者在术后听力诊所进行设备故障排除的就诊次数明显减少（<.001）。
拥有 2 个 CI 外部处理器的患者认为这对他们非常重要，并且由于缺乏功能处理器而导致无法获得声音的时间明显减少。由于机构合同通常决定患者是否将获得 1 个或 2 个声音处理器与他们的 CI 硬件一起使用，因此了解患者的偏好和使用模式对于指导以患者为中心的政策非常重要。
