Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 8, 2025

Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages
Published on: March 24, 2023
Determining treatment choices after the cochlear implant evaluation process
Andrew J Redmann1,2, Kareem Tawfik3, Theresa Hammer4
1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery University of Minnesota Minneapolis Minnesota USA.
Objectives:
Determine the proportion of patients starting the cochlear implant evaluation (CIE) process proceeding to cochlear implantation.Determine which patient factors are associated with undergoing cochlear implantation.
Methods:
Retrospective case series of all patients scheduled for a CIE within a tertiary academic neurotology practice between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2016. Management pathways of patients undergoing CIE were examined.
Results:
Two hundred thirty-seven adult patients were scheduled for CIE during the study period. Two hundred twenty-six patients started the evaluation process, and 203 patients completed full evaluation. Of patients that completed CIE, 166/203 (82%) met criteria for implantation and 37/203 (18%) did not meet criteria. Fifty-nine patients out of 166 patients (36%) meeting criteria did not receive implants and 107/166 (64%) underwent implantation, yielding an overall implantation rate of 47% (107/226) among patients scheduled for CIE. Common reasons for deferring CI among candidates included failure to show up for preoperative appointment (24%), choosing hearing aids as an alternative (22%), patient refusal (21%) and insurance issues (17%). Overall, CIE led to a new adjunctive hearing device (CI or hearing aid) in 113 (113/203, 56%) cases.
Conclusion:
Fifty-six (113/203) percent of patients who underwent CIE at an academic medical center underwent CI surgery or received an adjunctive hearing device, but 36% (59/166) of candidates did not receive a CI. Patients who forewent CI despite meeting candidacy criteria did so due to cost/insurance issues, or due to preference for auditory amplification rather than CI.
Level Of Evidence:
4.

