Cochlear Implants
by Patti Trautwein

20/20 hearing makes it to Hollywood – The importance of knowing your PTA

August 2, 2021
Share

By Patti Trautwein, MA, AuD, Vice President, Market Access & Reimbursement

What is normal hearing? When I asked that question among family, friends, and colleagues in early 2019 the answer was a sobering “I do not know.”  Yet, most could quickly rattle off measures for normal vision, blood pressure, cholesterol and body mass index. 1   

As hearing health professionals, we know how important the sense of hearing is to communicate and engage with others throughout one’s life. The COVID-19 pandemic requiring masking and social distancing has further highlighted the relevance of hearing health.2 Unfortunately, the lack of a common metric for hearing health, limits the understanding of consumers and primary care providers on how to prevent and treat hearing loss.

In a recent JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery publication, Frank Lin, MD, PhD and Nicholas Reed, AuD, suggest that the otolaryngology and audiology community converge on the 4-frequency pure-tone average (PTA) as a universal metric for hearing health.3 Further, the 2021  World Report on Hearing from the World Health Organization defined grades of hearing loss using the PTA. 4

On world hearing day last year, a Hearing 20/20 campaign initiated public education on normal hearing using the PTA as a standard metric.

So, imagine the thrill receiving notes from family, friends and colleagues who recently watched the new movie The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard with Samuel L Jackson, Salma Hayek and Ryan Reynolds where character Michael Bryce played by Ryan Reynolds states,“ I have 20/20 hearing, I can hear you.”

While diagnostically, we need a comprehensive battery to assess hearing function, the PTA as a simple, universal metric can help raise awareness of hearing health in the public vernacular on the big screen and hopefully off!

Read more about Hearing 20/20 here!

Patti

Patricia’s 25 years in the hearing healthcare industry includes roles in research and clinical studies, product management, education and training, sales and marketing. As Cochlear America’s VP of Market Access, Patricia is responsible for the reimbursement strategy of our product and service innovations, value-based evidence and economics, government affairs and related advocacy. Prior to her role in Market Access, Patricia served as the VP of Marketing, where she was responsible for the Marketing Strategy, Communications and Public Relations, Brand Ambassador Program and Product Management.

References:

  1. https://pronews.cochlear.com/what-is-normal-hearing-why-a-simple-and-consistent-answer-is-needed/
  2. https://www.hearingloss.org/hearing-loss-pandemic-survey/
  3. Lin FR, Reed NS. The Pure-Tone Average as a Universal Metric-Knowing Your Hearing. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Dec 23. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.4862. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 33355634.
  4. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/world-report-on-hearing
Related Posts
writing

Journal Club: Development of a 60/60 Guideline for Referring Adults for a Traditional Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation

May 28, 2020

By Duncan Meldrum, Senior Manager of Professional Engagement at Cochlear

Development of a 60/60 Guideline for Referring Adults for a Traditional Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation

Zwolan, Teresa A.; Schvartz-Leyzac, Kara C.; Pleasant, Terrence

Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery

Michigan Medicine

Otology & Neurotology

In today’s busy clinical environment, clinicians who value research-based practice often struggle to keep up with current literature.  To help, we’re excited to offer a Cochlear ProNews monthly feature – Journal Club!  Each month, rotating guest authors will present a current journal article summary that provides clinical insights.

This month’s Journal Club explores a recent U.S. study published in Otology & Neurotology, Development of a 60/60 Guideline for Referring Adults for a Traditional Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation (CICE).

What did the study investigate?

This study involved a retrospective data review to evaluate the effectiveness of a referral guideline for cochlear implant candidacy evaluations (CICE). The study proposes and demonstrates the effectiveness of implementing a 60/60 referral guideline, whereby the patient demonstrates a best ear unaided monosyllabic word score less than or equal to 60% correct, as well as an unaided pure-tone average in their better ear that is greater than or equal to 60 dB HL. It compared the highest preoperative unaided monosyllabic word recognition score in the right and left ears. The group also wanted to examine both “hit” and “miss” rates when using the guideline and therefore looked at candidates and non-candidates.

Why is this important? 

Overall, awareness and access surrounding cochlear implants for the general population is poor and evidence-based criteria regarding when to refer is lacking. Proposed reasons for such a low percentage of adult candidates receiving a cochlear implant include a lack of routine hearing screening for adults as well as a lack of awareness regarding candidacy criteria amongst primary care physicians, community audiologists and the general population.1  There is also a lack of referral guidelines for dispensing audiologists due to differences in test procedures used by referral sources and CI clinics. This study proposes a guideline that would be clinically useful for referring clinicians to identify patients that may be cochlear implant candidates while aligning with the criteria typically used in a CI clinic.

How did they do it?

Authors reviewed the medical records of 661 adults who participated in a CICE at the University of Michigan between January 2016 and September 2019. 250 adults met traditional indications for a CI while 279 did not meet traditional indications for a CI. Note that 132 were removed from analysis.

The group then examined preoperative data for candidates and non-candidates including unaided thresholds for each ear and best unaided monosyllabic word recognition score, comparing the right and left ears.

Results2

Of the 661 adult patients reviewed, 38% (250) met traditional cochlear implant indications.* Of these patients, 95% had a preoperative PTA in their better hearing ear that was greater than or equal to 60 dB with the majority falling between 70 and 89 dB hearing loss. This same patient group demonstrated a mean unaided best monosyllabic word score of 25% correct.

Figure 1 shows the preoperative unaided better ear Pure Tone Average (PTA) in traditional candidates. As the PTA goes up, the cumulative percentage goes down. Moreover, 95% of patients presented with a better ear PTA>60 dB and a vast majority of patients had a PTA much >60 dB.

Figure 2 shows the best unaided word recognition score of the traditional candidates. As the word score goes down the cumulative percentage goes down, leading the authors to conclude that patients with an unaided word recognition score in their better ear of less than 60% will likely be a candidate for a CI.

60/60 Referral Guideline

The data in this study showed that patients are very likely to qualify for a CI if they demonstrate a PTA in the better ear ≥60dB HL and a better ear monosyllabic word score of ≤60%. When examined as a screening tool for cochlear implant candidacy, the 60/60 guideline demonstrated a sensitivity (detection rate) of 96.3%, and a specificity rate of 65.6% (false-positive rate of 34%). Based on these findings, the authors believe that patients should be referred for a CICE if they meet the 60/60 guideline.

Discussion

One possible reason for under-referral may be the difference in test procedures used by referring professionals and audiologists who perform CICEs.  Non-performing professionals often indicate they prefer to recommend a patient for a CICE only when they are certain of candidacy. The 60/60 guideline provides professionals with justification for such referrals based on the data set.

In summary, the group recommends that patients be considered for a CICE if they obtain a score less than or equal to 60% correct on an unaided monosyllabic word test in the better ear and if they demonstrate a PTA greater than or equal to 60 dB HL. It should be noted that this guideline only refers to traditional candidates. The group is hopeful that this simple guideline will result in an increase in the number of patients who are referred for a traditional cochlear implant candidacy evaluation.

Learn more by accessing the publication and stay tuned for next month’s edition of Journal Club!

References:

1. Sorkin and Buchman, 2015

2. Zwolan, Teresa A.; Schvartz-Leyzac, Kara C.; Pleasant, Terrence Development of a 60/60 Guideline for Referring Adults for a Traditional Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation, Otology & Neurotology: April 20, 2020 – Volume Publish Ahead of Print – Issue – doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002664

* This is a summary of a study conducted to assess guidelines for referrals for cochlear implant evaluations. Guidelines for referrals are not the same as indications. The “traditional indications” outlined in this study are not identical to Cochlear’s FDA-approved indications, which are: The Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant System is intended for individuals 18 years of age or older who have bilateral, pre, peri or postlinguistic sensorineural hearing impairment and obtain limited benefit from appropriate binaural hearing aids.  These individuals typically have moderate to profound hearing loss in the low frequencies and profound (≥90 dB HL) hearing loss in the mid to high speech frequencies. Limited benefit from amplification is defined by test scores of 50% correct or less in the ear to be implanted (60% or less in the best-aided listening condition) on tape-recorded tests of open set sentence recognition.

Enhancing Pediatric Cochlear Implant Outcomes: Evidence-Based Insights

August 29, 2024

We understand that as professionals working with children with hearing loss, it can be challenging to keep up with high-quality data that drives evidence-based decision-making to achieve optimal outcomes. That is why we created the Pediatric Evidence Summary for Cochlear Implants. This document outlines key insights from significant studies around the benefits of cochlear implants for pediatric recipients.† Topics include:

  • The importance of early access to sound
  • Simultaneous and sequential implantation
  • Progress tracking and monitoring
  • Social Communication  

We strive to create strong relationships with our professionals and offer insights that enable you to provide the best care possible for your patients. We recognize that it takes a village to provide each child with a world of infinite possibilities, and we invite you to understand what the current industry standards are today and the evidence behind these standards. Please take a moment to read the Pediatric Evidence Summary for Cochlear Implants below:

FUN3797 ISS2 DEC2023 Pediatric Evidence SummaryDownload

We are excited to witness how this industry makes continued strides in maximizing each pediatric patient’s potential through continued studies in this area.


† In the United States, the Cochlear Nucleus Implant System is approved for use in children 9 to 24 months of age who have profound sensorineural hearing loss in both ears and demonstrate limited benefit from appropriate hearing aids. Children 2 years of age or older may demonstrate severe to profound hearing loss in both ears. In Canada, the Cochlear Nucleus Profile Plus (CI600) Series and Profile (CI500) Series Implant Systems are intended for use in children 9 to 24 months of age who have bilateral profound sensorineural deafness and demonstrate limited benefit from appropriate binaural hearing aids. Children 2 years of age or older may demonstrate severe to profound hearing loss bilaterally for both series of implants.

Views expressed are those of the individual. Consult your hearing health provider to determine if you are a candidate for Cochlear technology. Outcomes and results may vary.

Cochlear logo - white

©Cochlear Limited 2024. All rights reserved. ACE, Advance Off-Stylet, AOS, Ardium, AutoNRT, Autosensitivity, Baha, Baha SoftWear, BCDrive, Beam, Bring Back the Beat, Button, Carina, Cochlear, 科利耳, コクレア, 코클리어, Cochlear SoftWear, Contour, コントゥア, Contour Advance, Custom Sound, DermaLock, Freedom, Hear now. And always, Hugfit, Human Design, Hybrid, Invisible Hearing, Kanso, LowPro, MET, MP3000, myCochlear, mySmartSound, NRT, Nucleus, Osia, Outcome Focused Fitting, Off-Stylet, Piezo Power, Profile, Slimline, SmartSound, Softip, SoundArc, True Wireless, the elliptical logo, Vistafix, Whisper, WindShield and Xidium are either trademarks or registered trademarks of the Cochlear group of companies. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.

 

This material is intended for health professionals. If you are a consumer, please seek advice from your health professional about treatments for hearing loss. Outcomes may vary, and your health professional will advise you about the factors which could affect your outcome. Always read the instructions for use. Not all products are available in all countries. Please contact your local Cochlear representative for product information.

 

Cochlear ProNews is monitored Monday through Friday, excluding some holidays. Questions and inquiries submitted over the weekends or holidays may see a delay in response. For immediate assistance please contact us directly. You are solely responsible for your interactions with other members of our Websites. Cochlear reserves the right, but has no obligation, to monitor disputes or communications between you and other members of our Websites. For a full list of Cochlear’s terms of use, click here.