Next Article in Journal
A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level
Previous Article in Journal
Item Response Theory Applied to Factors Affecting the Patient Journey towards Hearing Rehabilitation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Audiology Research
Volume 6
Issue 2
10.4081/audiores.2016.160
audiolres-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
Audiology Research is published by MDPI from Volume 10 Issue 2 (2020). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with PAGEPress.
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Multicentre Evaluation of the Naída CI Q70 Sound Processor: Feedback from Cochlear Implant Users and Professionals

by
Jeanette Martin
1,
Christine Poncet-Wallet
2,
Angelika Illg
3,
Sarah Perrin-Webb
4,
Lise Henderson
5,
Nathalie Noël-Petroff
6,
Gennaro Auletta
7,
Maria Grazia Barezzani
8,
Karim Houri
9,
Indian Research Group
10,
Heike Bagus
11,
Ulrich Hoppe
12,
Jane Humphries
13,
Wiebke van Treeck
14,
Jeroen J. Briaire
15,
Martina Brendel
16 and
Nathalie Mathias
17,*
1
St Thomas’ Hearing Implant Centre, London, UK
2
Hôpital Rothschild – CRIC, Paris, France
3
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
4
West of England Hearing Implant Programme, Bristol, UK
5
Manchester Cochlear Implant Programme, Manchester, UK
6
Hôpital Robert Debré, Paris, France
7
Policlinico di Napoli, Naples, Italy
8
Ospedale Dei Bambini - Ronchettino, Brescia, Italy
9
Houri Hearing, Beirut, Lebanon
10
Indian Research Group, Bangalore, India
11
CIC Ruhr, Essen, Germany
12
Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Klinik Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
13
John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
14
Hörzentrum Düsseldorf, HNO-Univ.-Klinik, Düsseldorf, Germany
15
Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
16
Advanced Bionics GmbH, Hannover, Germany
17
Advanced Bionics SARL, Bron, France
 
add Show full affiliation list
 
remove Hide full affiliation list
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Audiol. Res. 2016, 6(2), 160; https://doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2016.160
Submission received: 20 July 2016 / Revised: 10 November 2016 / Accepted: 18 November 2016 / Published: 22 December 2016
Versions Notes

Abstract

The aim of this survey was to gather data from both implant recipients and professionals on the ease of use of the Naída CI Q70 (Naída CI) sound processor from Advanced Bionics and on the usefulness of the new functions and features available. A secondary objective was to investigate fitting practices with the new processor. A comprehensive user satisfaction survey was conducted in a total of 186 subjects from 24 centres. In parallel, 23 professional questionnaires were collected from 11 centres. Overall, there was high satisfaction with the Naída CI processor from adults, children, experienced and new CI users as well as from professionals. The Naída CI processor was shown as being easy to use by all ages of recipients and by professionals. The majority of experienced CI users rated the Naída CI processor as being similar or better than their previous processor in all areas surveyed. The Naída CI was recommended by the professionals for fitting in all populations. Features like UltraZoom, ZoomControl and DuoPhone would not be fitted to very young children in contrast to adults. Positive ratings were obtained for ease of use, comfort and usefulness of the new functions and features of the Naída CI sound processor. Seventy-seven percent of the experienced CI users rated the new processor as being better than their previous sound processor from a general point of view. The survey also showed that fitting practices were influenced by the age of the user.
Keywords: Naída CI Q70; sound processor; ease of use; fitting; cochlear implant Naída CI Q70; sound processor; ease of use; fitting; cochlear implant

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Martin, J.; Poncet-Wallet, C.; Illg, A.; Perrin-Webb, S.; Henderson, L.; Noël-Petroff, N.; Auletta, G.; Barezzani, M.G.; Houri, K.; Indian Research Group; et al. Multicentre Evaluation of the Naída CI Q70 Sound Processor: Feedback from Cochlear Implant Users and Professionals. Audiol. Res. 2016, 6, 160. https://doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2016.160

AMA Style

Martin J, Poncet-Wallet C, Illg A, Perrin-Webb S, Henderson L, Noël-Petroff N, Auletta G, Barezzani MG, Houri K, Indian Research Group, et al. Multicentre Evaluation of the Naída CI Q70 Sound Processor: Feedback from Cochlear Implant Users and Professionals. Audiology Research. 2016; 6(2):160. https://doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2016.160

Chicago/Turabian Style

Martin, Jeanette, Christine Poncet-Wallet, Angelika Illg, Sarah Perrin-Webb, Lise Henderson, Nathalie Noël-Petroff, Gennaro Auletta, Maria Grazia Barezzani, Karim Houri, Indian Research Group, and et al. 2016. "Multicentre Evaluation of the Naída CI Q70 Sound Processor: Feedback from Cochlear Implant Users and Professionals" Audiology Research 6, no. 2: 160. https://doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2016.160

APA Style

Martin, J., Poncet-Wallet, C., Illg, A., Perrin-Webb, S., Henderson, L., Noël-Petroff, N., Auletta, G., Barezzani, M. G., Houri, K., Indian Research Group, Bagus, H., Hoppe, U., Humphries, J., van Treeck, W., Briaire, J. J., Brendel, M., & Mathias, N. (2016). Multicentre Evaluation of the Naída CI Q70 Sound Processor: Feedback from Cochlear Implant Users and Professionals. Audiology Research, 6(2), 160. https://doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2016.160

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop