CROS and Quality of Life of Elderly Cochlear Implant Recipients and Their Care Givers

AZBio speech testing was performed in a sound booth with two speakers. Sentences at 60 dB were presented in the following conditions: (1) CI-only, speech presented from the front in quiet; (2) CI-only, speech in the non-CI ear in quiet; (3) CI-only, speech in the non-CI ear in noise; (4) CI+CROS device, speech in the non-CI ear in noise. A higher average percentage of words repeated correctly corresponds to greater understanding. The goal was to assess the impact of the CROS device on speech and speech understanding. The test was planned at enrollment and after 6 months of CROS use to evaluate long-term effects, but due to COVID-19, only the enrollment test was completed.

Time frame: At baseline (enrollment visit), with a duration of 50 minutes

Population: 7 participants with unilateral Advanced Bionics CII/90K/Ultra cochlear implant cochlear implant and CROS device

The Auditory Performance and Satisfaction Scale for Single-Sided Deafness (APS-SSD) assesses hearing in various environments through 31 statements grouped by context (general, home, social, work/school). Hearing ability is rated from 0: Can function fine to 6: Cannot function at all, lower score indicates better performance.The second section has 2 parts: Part one: 13 statements about satisfaction with CROS device, rated from 0: very satisfied to 6: very dissatisfied, lower score indicates higher satisfaction. Part two: 10 miscellaneous questions regarding overall quality and satisfaction with the CROS device. The data table shows the number of subjects reporting improvements in auditory satisfaction, assessed by comparing baseline responses to the 6-month follow-up. A decrease in score indicates perceived improvement. Rows represent categories of participants' auditory experiences, while column shows the number of participants reporting positive changes in that category.

Time frame: At baseline (enrollment visit) and 6 months after using the CROS device.

Population: Data table is based on the responses of 7 participants with unilateral Advanced Bionics CII/90K/Ultra cochlear implant cochlear implant and CROS device. These participants were assessed for improvements in auditory satisfaction by comparing their responses at baseline and again at the 6-month follow-up. Each row corresponds to a different category/aspect of the participants' auditory experience. The column shows number of participants who reported a positive change for each statement.

To evaluate the effect of CROS device use on participant's quality of life, they completed the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) Adapted from Hinderink et al., 2000, a subjective self-assessment of health-related assessment for cochlear implant (CI) users that includes 60 questions. The answers to the questionnaire range on a 5-point Likert scale never (0), rarely (1), sometimes(3), very often(4), and always (5). A higher score represents a better quality of life experience. The table summarizes perceived changes in life quality among participants after 6 months of using the CROS device, assessed by comparing responses at baseline questionnaire to those at the 6-month follow-up. An increase in scores on the questionnaires indicates a perceived improvement in quality of life. Rows represent the categories of life quality changes reported by participants, while the column shows the count of participants within each category.

Time frame: At baseline, and after 6 months of CROS use

Population: 7 Advanced Bionics CII/90K/Ultra cochlear implant and CROS device users

To asses FCPs' quality of life, they completed the Significant Other Scale for Hearing Disability (SOS-HEAR) questionnaire at baseline and 6 months after the CI users whom they communicate with began using the CROS device. The SOS-HEAR evaluates the disability experienced by the FCP of individuals with hearing loss (i.e., CROS device users). This questionnaire has 26 Statements grouped into: concern for partner, emotional reactions, going out and socializing, relationship changes, communication burden, and communication changes. FCPs rated statements on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0-4 with 0=No Problem and 4=A Complete Problem. A lower score represents better outcome. Table shows communication outcomes reported by FCPs, assessed by comparing their baseline responses to their 6-month follow-up responses. A decrease in scores represents improvement in communication with CI users. Rows represent communication experience and column shows the count of FCPs within each category

Time frame: At baseline(enrollment visit), and after 6 months after CROS device use

Population: The table shows communication outcomes reported by 7 Frequent Communication Partners (FCPs) who had at least two hours per week of in-person interactions with the recipient of Advanced Bionics CII/90K/Ultra implants/CROS device