Literature DB >> 23223922

[Cochlear implant treatment in Germany].

R Jacob1, Y Stelzig.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Restoration of impaired auditory function through cochlear implant is possible, with high reliably and great success. Nevertheless, there are regular disputes between patients and insurance companies due to high costs. In Germany, approx. 1.9 Mio. people are severely hearing impaired. It can be estimated that for adequate hearing rehabilitation about 30,000 cochlear implants/year are necessary. Currently, less than 10% of those affected are offered cochlear implant. DISCUSSION: A handicap is defined if there is deviation from normal hearing for more than 6 months. This sets a time frame for the supply with cochlear implant after sudden deafness. The professional code requires to advice all medical options to a person seeking help for hearing loss. This includes benefit-risk consideration. At this point, the economic aspect plays no role. The indication for medical treatment is only subject to the treating physician and should not be modified by non-physicians or organizations. It should be noted that a supply of hearing aids is qualitatively different to the help from a cochlear implant, which provides a restoration of lost function. In social law (SGB V and IX) doctors are requested to advise and recommend all measures which contribute to normal hearing (both sides). This indicates that doctors may be prosecuted for not offering help when medically possible, just because health insurance employees did not approve the cost balance.
CONCLUSION: The current situation, with insufficient medical care for the hearing impaired, needs clarifying. To do this, patients, health insurance companies, the political institutions, legislation and professional societies need to accept their responsibilities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23223922     DOI: 10.1007/s00106-012-2559-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HNO        ISSN: 0017-6192            Impact factor:   1.284


  18 in total

1.  Speech understanding in quiet and noise in bilateral users of the MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ cochlear implant system.

Authors:  Joachim Müller; F Schön; J Helms
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Criteria of candidacy for unilateral cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults II: cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  NICE's cost effectiveness threshold.

Authors:  John Appleby; Nancy Devlin; David Parkin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-08-25

4.  [Improving speech comprehension using a new cochlear implant speech processor].

Authors:  J Müller-Deile; T Kortmann; U Hoppe; H Hessel; A Morsnowski
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  [Audiological results with cochlear implants for single-sided deafness].

Authors:  R Jacob; Y Stelzig; P Nopp; P Schleich
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.284

6.  [Unilateral deafness and cochlear implantation: audiological diagnostic evaluation and outcomes].

Authors:  S Arndt; R Laszig; A Aschendorff; R Beck; C Schild; F Hassepass; G Ihorst; S Kroeger; P Kirchem; T Wesarg
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.284

7.  Importance of age and postimplantation experience on speech perception measures in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  B Robert Peters; Ruth Litovsky; Aaron Parkinson; Jennifer Lake
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.311

8.  Vision impairment and hearing loss among community-dwelling older Americans: implications for health and functioning.

Authors:  John E Crews; Vincent A Campbell
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  The economics of cochlear implant management in France: a multicentre analysis.

Authors:  Laurent Molinier; Hélène Bocquet; Vanina Bongard; Bernard Fraysse
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2009-05-28

10.  Benefits of bilateral electrical stimulation with the nucleus cochlear implant in adults: 6-month postoperative results.

Authors:  Roland Laszig; Antje Aschendorff; Matthias Stecker; Joachim Müller-Deile; Steffen Maune; Norbert Dillier; Benno Weber; Matthias Hey; Klaus Begall; Thomas Lenarz; Rolf-D Battmer; Melanie Böhm; Thomas Steffens; Juergen Strutz; Thomas Linder; Rudolf Probst; John Allum; Martin Westhofen; Wolfgang Doering
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.311

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  [Speech audiometry for indication of conventional and implantable hearing aids].

Authors:  U Hoppe; A Hast
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  [Cochlear implants in the social courts].

Authors:  A Lottner; H Iro; A Schützenberger; U Hoppe
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  [Music therapy in adults with cochlear implants : Effects on music perception and subjective sound quality].

Authors:  E Hutter; M Grapp; H Argstatter
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.284

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.