Quality control in cochlear implant therapy: clinical practice guidelines and registries in European countries
العنوان: | Quality control in cochlear implant therapy: clinical practice guidelines and registries in European countries |
---|---|
المؤلفون: | A. Loth, C. Vazzana, M. Leinung, D. Guderian, C. Issing, U. Baumann, T. Stöver |
المصدر: | European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 279:4779-4786 |
بيانات النشر: | Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2022. |
سنة النشر: | 2022 |
مصطلحات موضوعية: | Otorhinolaryngology, General Medicine |
الوصف: | 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. |
تدمد: | 1434-4726 0937-4477 |
URL الوصول: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::e2979971929503f67ec2a4365bd06d85 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-022-07263-4 |
حقوق: | OPEN |
رقم الأكسشن: | edsair.doi...........e2979971929503f67ec2a4365bd06d85 |
قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
تدمد: | 14344726 09374477 |
---|