Home Your basket
• Dysphagia, a geriatric po...
   Price 8.50 €
• Mandibular reconstruction...
   Price 8.50 €
• Nasal septal abscess: A c...
   Price 5.50 €
• Aging and life quality: A...
   Price 12.50 €
• Setting up a «Bonebridge»...
   Price 10.50 €
• Complicated fungal sinusi...
   Price 8.50 €
• Hearing aid : practical a...
   Price 8.50 €
• Type III ossiculoplasty w...
   Price 5.50 €
• Papillary carcinoma arisi...
   Price 5.50 €
• Metastatic angiosarcoma t...
   Price 5.50 €
• Sphenochoanal polyp: Repo...
   Price 5.50 €
• Adenoid cystic carcinoma ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Aesthetic augmentation of...
   Price 10.50 €
• Cervical spondylodiskitis...
   Price 5.50 €
• «Mini-rhinoplasty»...
   Price 10.50 €
• A study of peristomal rec...
   Price 5.50 €
• Adenoid cystic carcinoma ...
   Price 5.50 €
• Cervical liposuction: A r...
   Price 10.50 €
• Radiofrequency inferior t...
   Price 14.00 €
• Myringoplasties for anter...
   Price 10.50 €
• A survey of current wound...
   Price 5.50 €
• Merkel cell carcinoma of ...
   Price 8.50 €
• Hypersensitivity to inhal...
   Price 10.50 €
• Balance disorders in the ...
   Price 8.50 €
• Pharyngolaryngectomy for ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Transoral surgical treatm...
   Price 8.50 €
• Study of the supra-glotti...
   Price 10.50 €
• Pneumoparotid: a case rep...
   Price 8.50 €
• Learning curve in sialend...
   Price 10.50 €
• Decompression surgery for...
   Price 8.50 €
• Migrant foreign body of t...
   Price 10.50 €
• Contribution of clinical ...
   Price 14.00 €
• Pneumatization (concha bu...
   Price 8.50 €

Total Order 290.50 €

contents
2019
   N# 1 |
2018
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2017
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2016
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2015
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2014
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2013
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2012
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2011
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2010
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2009
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2008
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2007
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2006
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2005
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2004
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2003
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2002
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2001
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2000
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1999
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1998
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
1997
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1996
   N# 4 | 5 |

Click on the number of the review to see the content
Teaching bulletin CME
List of all teaching bulletins CME.
Editor reading committee
Editor reading committee.
To publish...
Instructions for authors
Archives Press and Books
Select of books and press articles.
Mailing list
News information letter.
Subscription prices


If you wish to adjust the size of the displayed characters, click in the high menu on "Your account" and choose the desired size.



  Contents > Previous page > Article detail print Order
o Issue N# 3 - 2013 o

OTOLOGY

Cochlear implantation in older patients: Outcomes and comparisons


Authors : Rafferty A, Tapper L, Strachan D, Raine C. (Bradford)

Ref. : Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol. 2013;134,3:119-124.

Article published in english
Downloadable PDF document english



Summary : Objectives: A review of adults receiving cochlear implants (CIs) at the Yorkshire Cochlear Implant Service (YCIS) was performed to assess whether age affects use or outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis of all patients over the age of 50 implanted and habilitated at the YCIS was undertaken. Outcome measures included quality of life (QoL) question­naires and speech perception tests: CUNY sentences and BKB sentences. Comparisons were made between patients implanted age 50 to 59 (A), 60 to 69 (B) and 70 and over (C). Patients with English as a second language and those implanted for less than 9 months were excluded. Data was analysed using a repeated measure regression model. Results: 80 adults were included; A, 31; B, 29; C, 20. Significant improvements were seen in speech perception scores in all groups from pre-implant to 3 months. No statistically significant difference was found between the 3 groups in any outcome measure. QoL scores overall showed increased independence and greater partici­pa­tion in social activities with all patients feeling their implant had been successful. Discussion: Increased life expectancy and availability of cochlear implants (CIs) has led to greater numbers of older patients being eligible for implantation. Our results show improved speech perception and QoL outcomes in all groups. The lack of statistically significant differences between age groups supports the benefits of CIs in the older population. Older age should not be a discriminating factor in candidacy for cochlear implantation and referral of older patients to implant centres should be encouraged.

Price : 10.50 €      order
|


Subscribe online - Pay by credit card!


© Copyright 1999-2024 - Revue de Laryngologie   Réalisation - Hébergement ELIDEE