From hearing aids to cochlear implants: The journey for private patients in New Zealand

Abstract

Objectives

To understand adults' journey from hearing aids to cochlear implants (CIs).

Methods

Qualitative, exploratory design using semi-structured interviews with twelve postlingually-deafened adults.

Results and Discussion

All participants reported social isolation and/or depression. ‘Not hearing well enough’ was the most-common motivator to seek a CI. Due to the long wait for a public CI, they opted to pay for their implant privately. Funding was the most prominent barrier identified, with most participants using their own savings. The biggest struggle was in the period 3-months post switch-on. Many participants felt progress was slow and that they should have been doing better. After this period, benefits were most noted in quiet, with environmental sounds, and in helping them become more sociable. Music and telephone use were still areas many struggled with.

Conclusions

Participants reported the CI was worth the cost, that they would recommend it to others, and would do it again. Self-motivation was the biggest facilitator to success, with hearing professionals playing an integral role throughout the entire journey. There was a large variety of subthemes reflecting the diversity and individuality of the transition.

Keywords:

• Cochlear implants
• Patient journey
• Private funding
• Hearing aids
• Patient centred care

Acknowledgements

Funding for this study was provided by Advanced Bionics, although Advanced Bionics had no input into any part of the study or any aspect of this manuscript, and recipients of all devices were invited to participate. The authors would also like to thank both the Southern Cochlear Implant Program, and particularly Jill Mustard, Sarah Weusten and Penny Monteath for their assistance with recruitment and compiling the participant audiological data. Finally, the authors would like to thank the participants and their families.

Disclaimer statements

Contributors The study idea and methodology were developed by the first author and refined in consultation with the other two authors. Data collection was conducted by the second author, and data analyses, interpretation and the preparation of this manuscript was performed by all three authors.

Funding The first author was a previous employee of Advanced Bionics, and funding for this study was provided by Advanced Bionics, however data analyses, interpretation and the preparation of this manuscript was performed after the author had left Advanced Bionics, and Advanced Bionics had no input into any part of the study (from the protocol development through to analyses or interpretation) nor any aspect of this manuscript.

Conflicts of interest All manufacturers were included in the study (without bias) with no comparison made amongst manufacturers. Advanced Bionics did not have any input into any part of the study from the study design, execution, data analyses, or data interpretation, nor did they contribute to this manuscript in any way.

Ethics approval This study was approved by the University of Canterbury Human Research Ethics Committee (HEC 2019/03/LR).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2022.2154426.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Valerie Looi

Valerie Looi holds affiliate academic positions with several institutions and specializes in music & CI research.

Natasha de Jongh

Natasha de Jongh is a clinical audiologist.

Rebecca Kelly-Campbell

Rebecca Kelly-Campbell is an Associate Professor at the University of Canterbury.