Cochlear Implant Outcomes and Quality of Life in the Elderly
Cochlear Implantation is an established safe and effective treatment for patients with severe-profound sensori neural hearing loss. Demand for implants in the UK has increased over time partly as a result of the population living for a longer time and li
- PDF / 96,244 Bytes
- 8 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 96 Downloads / 265 Views
Cochlear Implantation in the Elderly and Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2669 Summary Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2672
#
Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2010 (USA)
2668
155
Cochlear implant outcomes and quality of life in the elderly
Abstract: Cochlear Implantation is an established safe and effective treatment for patients with severe-profound sensori neural hearing loss. Demand for implants in the UK has increased over time partly as a result of the population living for a longer time and > life expectancy is also increasing. The prevalence of severe-profound hearing loss in the 60–80 year old age group is estimated to be 1.3% rising to 16.8% in the over 80 year old group and so the demand for > cochlear implants in this group of patients is higher. The evaluation of the clinical effectiveness of cochlear implantation in the elderly population utilizes tests of speech discrimination ability and the outcome scores are compared to the scores of younger patients. The studies find that there is no significant difference in outcomes between the two groups (p > 0.05). Health related quality of life questionnaires administered to elderly patients show a statistically significant benefit when the pre operative health status is compared to the post operative health status (p < 0.001). In conclusion the evidence indicates that cochlear implantation in elderly patients will allow them to gain significant hearing and quality of life benefits that are comparable to the benefits that younger patients experience. These outcomes should encourage > healthcare purchasers to ensure that funding is allocated for implantation in the elderly population. List of Abbreviations: AB, Arthur Boothroyd; BKB, Bamford Kowal Bench; CID, Central Institute for the Deaf; CNC, consonant vowel consonant; CUNY, City University New York; GBI, > Glasgow Benefit Inventory; GHSI, > Glasgow Health Status Inventory; HINT, Hearing in Noise Test
1
Introduction
The population of Great Britain has been living longer over the past 20 years, but this additional longevity has not necessarily been lived in good health. Life expectancy and healthy life expectancy (expected years of life in good or fairly good health) both increased between 1981 and 2001, with life expectancy increasing at a faster rate than healthy life expectancy. Life expectancy is higher for females than for males. In 2001 the life expectancy at birth for females was 80.4 years compared with 75.7 years for males. However, life expectancy for males has been increasing faster than for females. There was an increase of 4.8 years in male life expectancy between 1981 and 2001. For females the corresponding increase was 3.6 years. The gap in healthy life expectancy between males and females is smaller than for total life expectancy. In 2001, healthy life expectancy at birth was 67.0 years for males and 68.8 years for females, a gap of 1.8 years.
Data Loading...
