|
Title
|
|
|
|
Quality of life, hearing results, patient satisfaction and postoperative complications of day-case versus inpatient unilateral cochlear implantation in adults : a randomized controlled, equivalence trial
| |
|
Author
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
| ObjectiveTo investigate the hypothesis that day-case cochlear implantation is associated with equal quality of life, hearing benefits and complications rates, compared to inpatient cochlear implantation.Study designA single-center, non-blinded, randomized controlled, equivalence trial in a tertiary referral center.MethodsThirty adult patients with post-lingual bilateral sensorineural hearing loss eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation surgery were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group. The effect on general quality of life, patient satisfaction, (subjective) hearing improvement, postoperative complications and causes of crossover and/or readmission were assessed using questionnaires, auditory evaluations and patients' charts over a follow-up period of 1 year.ResultsOverall quality of life measured by the HUI3 was equal between the day-case (n = 14) and inpatient group (n = 14). The overall patients' satisfaction showed a slight favor towards an inpatient approach. There was no significant difference in the subjective and objective hearing improvement between both treatment groups. During the 1-year follow-up period no major complications occurred. Minor complications occurred intraoperatively in three day-case patients resulting in three out of nine admissions of day-case patients. Other causes of admission of day-case patients were nausea and vomiting (n = 1), drowsiness (n = 1), late scheduled surgery (n = 2), social reasons (n = 1), or due to an unclear reason (n = 1). No patients required readmission.ConclusionWe found equal outcomes of QoL, patient satisfaction, objective, and subjective hearing outcomes between day-case and inpatient unilateral cochlear implantation. Nine out of 14 day-case patients were admitted for at least one night postoperatively (crossover). No major complications occurred in both groups. A day-case approach seems feasible when using specific patient selection, surgical planning and the preoperative provision of patient information into account. Besides this, the familiarity with a day-case approach of both patient and the surgical team can increase the feasibility of day-case surgery.Level of evidence1. |
| |
|
Language
|
|
|
|
English
| |
|
Source (journal)
|
|
|
|
European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology / European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies; European Laryngological Society. - Berlin, 1990, currens
| |
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
New york
:
Springer
,
2024
| |
|
ISSN
|
|
|
|
0937-4477
[print]
1434-4726
[online]
| |
|
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.1007/S00405-023-08352-8
| |
|
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
281
(2024)
, p. 2313-2325
| |
|
ISI
|
|
|
|
001136826500003
| |
|
Pubmed ID
|
|
|
|
38180606
| |
|
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Full text (open access)
|
|
|
|
| |
|