Current Profile of Adults Presenting for Preoperative Cochlear Implant Evaluation.

This was a single academic medical center sample, so it may not represent adults seeking cochlear implant evaluation across the United States. The data were collected from 2013 to 2015, and the authors note the patient mix may already have changed after later device releases and greater awareness. Comparisons with older clinical trials are imperfect because a large clinical population is not the same as trial participants. The sample was not representative of the local racial and ethnic composition, and the category two or more races was not offered, making direct comparison difficult. Hearing loss etiology was often based on patient report when no physician diagnosis was available. AzBio at +5 dB SNR was not available for all patients because it was added mid-2014 and was not required if quiet AzBio was below 20%. The APHAB and SSQ questionnaires were not designed or validated for cochlear implant recipients, though they were used clinically. Meeting EAS/Hybrid criteria does not mean implantation is appropriate; people who benefit from hearing aids are not cochlear implant candidates. The article gives two collection windows, August 2013 through July 2015 and August 2013 to August 2015, so the exact end date is unclear. The text and Table 1 give different mean QSMD scores for nonimplanted ears, 66.6% versus 65.4%.

The data were collected in conjunction with a National Institute of Health-funded study, and the paper is listed as NIH extramural research support. The supplied text does not report an industry conflict-of-interest declaration.

Do not read the 8.7% CNC score as a cochlear implant outcome. It is preoperative aided word recognition in the ear to be implanted, and this study did not test post-implant benefit.