Long-term effects on the quality of life following cochlear implant treatment in older patients

Purpose: Even in older patients, hearing rehabilitation with a cochlear implant has become an established method for deafened or severely hearing-impaired patients. In addition to the hearing improvement, numerous other effects of CI treatment can be observed in clinical routine. In the literature, there is multiple evidence for a rapid and significant improvement in quality of life with CI treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of hearing rehabilitation using CI on the quality of life in older patients (≥ 65 years). Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study examined 84 patients between the age of 65 and 101 years who received unilateral CI treatment for the first time between one and 10 years ago. The World Health Organization Quality-of-Life Scale-Old (WHOQL-OLD) was used to determine the quality of life. The study cohort was divided into three groups to compare the quality of life over time: group I (1–3 years after CI treatment), group II (4–6 years after CI treatment), and group III (7–10 years after CI treatment). In addition, the data from this study were compared with the results of our previous study (Issing et al. 2020) in which we focused on the first 6 months after CI treatment. Results: In all three groups, there was a significant improvement in monosyllabic discrimination within 1 year after CI fitting (p > 0.001). No significant differences were found between the three groups. There were no significant differences between the three groups in the WHOQOL-OLD total score (p = 0.487) or any of the other six facets. Moreover, no significant differences were found compared to the study group of our previous study 6 months after CI treatment. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the long-term stability of the improved quality of life following unilateral CI treatment in patients aged 65 years or older

Quality control in cochlear implant therapy: clinical practice guidelines and registries in European countries

Purpose: The treatment with a cochlear implant (CI) is the gold standard in therapy of patients with profound hearing loss or deafness. Successful hearing rehabilitation with a CI is a complex, multi-stage process. In medicine, “Clinical Practice Guidelines” (CPG) are widely accepted for the standardization of such processes. These are supplemented by medical registries in which data regarding the treatment can be collected and evaluated. The aim of this paper is to identify currently existing CI-related CPGs and registries in Europe. Methods: Between 01/2021 and 06/2021, 42 countries on the European continent, including the United Kingdom, Russia and Turkey, were screened using an internet search (search engine: Google) and a key word search in the Pubmed database. Search terms were the respective country name combined with the following terms: “Cochlear Implant”, “CI”, “Cochlear implant clinical practice guideline”, “CI Guideline”, “Cochlear Implant Registry”, “CI Registry”, “Ear nose throat society”. The internet search was conducted in English as well as in the corresponding national language. The objective was to identify a CI-related CPG or registry. Results: A CPG was found in 16 of 42 (38%) countries. In terms of population, this accounts for 645 million out of 838 million people (77%). A registry existed in 4 of the 42 (10%) countries assessed. This corresponds to 102 million out of 838 million (12%) people. In total, 4 out of 42 countries (10%) had both a CPG and a registry. Conclusion: Our work shows numerous efforts in Europe to standardize CI care at the national level. While most people in Europe already live in countries with a CPG, this is not the case for CI registries. European-wide consensus on CPGs or registries does not yet exist. The present study thus provides a first assessment of the distribution of CI-related CPGs and registries

Has the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic improved teaching? - Virtual education in otorhinolaryngology from the students’ perspective

Hintergrund und Fragestellung: Die Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2(SARS-CoV-2)-Pandemie hat die Ausbildung von Medizinstudierenden grundlegend verändert. Die Notwendigkeit von Kontaktbeschränkungen und die damit einhergehende Forderung nach Distanzunterricht hat dazu geführt, dass innerhalb kurzer Zeit digitale Lehrformate umgesetzt werden mussten. Ziel dieser Arbeit war die Auswertung der studentischen Evaluationsergebnisse für virtuellen Unterricht im Fach Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde während der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie und ein Vergleich mit den zuvor erhobenen Evaluationsergebnissen unter Präsenzbedingungen. Material und Methoden: Untersucht wurden die Evaluationsergebnisse für die Blockpraktika im Wintersemester 2020/21 und im Sommersemester 2021, die in einem virtuellen Format mit kurzer Präsenzphase durchgeführt wurden, sowie die der komplett im konventionellen Präsenzformat durchgeführten Praktika von Sommersemester 2018 bis Wintersemester 2019/20. Die anonyme Befragung der Studierenden bezog sich auf verschiedene Aspekte der Lehrveranstaltung, wie z. B. Organisation, Didaktik und Lernatmosphäre. Ergebnisse: Von 16 abgefragten Kategorien zeigten 14 (87,5%) signifikant bessere Evaluationsergebnisse für die virtuellen Praktika verglichen mit den zuvor im Präsenzformat durchgeführten Praktika. Diese sehr positive Bewertung des digitalen Lehrangebots zeigte im Pandemieverlauf über die Dauer von zwei Semestern keine signifikante Änderung. Schlussfolgerung: Die vorliegenden Daten belegen die hohe Akzeptanz eines digitalen Lehrangebots im Fach HNO-Heilkunde für Studierende. Auch wenn unerlässliche Bestandteile der ärztlichen Ausbildung, wie der Unterricht am Patienten und das Erlernen klinisch-praktischer Fertigkeiten, weiterhin nur im Präsenzformat realisiert werden können, legen die Ergebnisse nahe, dass digitale Elemente auch nach der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie eine Rolle im Medizinstudium spielen könnten.Background: The Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV‑2) pandemic has significantly changed the education of medical students. Due to the contact restrictions and the associated requirement for distance learning, digital teaching formats had to be implemented within a short period of time. The aim of our work was to analyze student evaluation data for virtual teaching in otorhinolaryngology (ORL) during the SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic and to compare the data with previously obtained evaluation data under face-to-face conditions. Materials and methods: Evaluation data for the block practical courses in winter semester 2020/21 and summer semester 2021, which were carried out in a virtual format with a short face-to-face phase as well as those for the block practical courses from summer semester 2018 to winter semester 2019/20, which had been performed completely in a conventional face-to-face format, were analyzed. The anonymous survey of the students focused on various aspects of the courses such as organization, didactics and learning atmosphere. Results: Of 16 surveyed categories, 14 (87.5%) showed significantly better evaluation results for the virtual courses compared to the courses carried out previously under face-to-face conditions. This very positive assessment of the digital teaching offer showed no significant change during the course of the pandemic over the period of two semesters. Conclusions: Our data show a high acceptance of digital teaching in ORL for students. Even though essential components of the medical education such as teaching on the patient and clinical-practical skills can still only be realized in a face-to-face format, our data suggest that digital elements could also play a role in medical education after the SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic

Typical symptoms of common otorhinolaryngological diseases may mask a SARS-CoV-2 infection

Purpose: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replicates predominantly in the upper respiratory tract and is primarily transmitted by droplets and aerosols. Taking the medical history for typical COVID-19 symptoms and PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 testing have become established as screening procedures. The aim of this work was to describe the clinical appearance of SARS-CoV-2-PCR positive patients and to determine the SARS-CoV-2 contact risk for health care workers (HCW). Methods: The retrospective study included n = 2283 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests from n = 1725 patients with otorhinolaryngological (ORL) diseases performed from March to November 2020 prior to inpatient treatment. In addition, demographic data and medical history were assessed. Results: n = 13 PCR tests (0.6%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The positive rate showed a significant increase during the observation period (p < 0.01). None of the patients had clinical symptoms that led to a suspected diagnosis of COVID-19 before PCR testing. The patients were either asymptomatic (n = 4) or had symptoms that were interpreted as symptoms typical of the ORL disease or secondary diagnoses (n = 9). Conclusion: The identification of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients is a considerable challenge in clinical practice. Our findings illustrate that taking a medical history alone is of limited value and cannot replace molecular SARS-CoV-2 testing, especially for patients with ORL diseases. Our data also demonstrate that there is a high probability of contact with SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in everyday clinical practice, so that the use of personal protective equipment, even in apparently “routine cases”, is highly recommended