International Consensus Statements on Intraoperative Testing for Cochlear Implantation Surgery

作者：Farid Alzhrani, Isra Aljazeeri, Yassin Abdelsamad, Abdulrahman Alsanosi, Ana H. Kim, Ángel Ramos‐Macías, Ángel Ramos de Miguel, Anja Kurz, Artur Lorens, Bruce J. Gantz, Craig A. Buchman, Dayse Távora‐Vieira, Georg Mathias Sprinzl, Griet Mertens, James E. Saunders, Julie Kosaner, Laila M. Telmesani, Luis Lassaletta, Manohar Bance, Medhat Yousef, Meredith A. Holcomb, Oliver F. Adunka, Per Cayé-Thomasen, Piotr H. Skarżyński, Ranjith Rajeswaran, Robert Briggs, Seung Ha Oh, Stefan K. Plontke, Stephen O’Leary, Sumit Agrawal, Tatsuya Yamasoba, Thomas Lenarz, Thomas Wesarg, Walter Kutz, Patrick J Connolly, Ilona Anderson, Abdulrahman Hagr · 发表于：Ear and Hearing · 年份：2024 · DOI：10.1097/aud.0000000000001526 · 被引用次数：10 · 研究领域：Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation、Delphi Technique in Research、Airway Management and Intubation Techniques

OBJECTIVES: A wide variety of intraoperative tests are available in cochlear implantation. However, no consensus exists on which tests constitute the minimum necessary battery. We assembled an international panel of clinical experts to develop, refine, and vote upon a set of core consensus statements. DESIGN: A literature review was used to identify intraoperative tests currently used in the field and draft a set of provisional statements. For statement evaluation and refinement, we used a modified Delphi consensus panel structure. Multiple interactive rounds of voting, evaluation, and feedback were conducted to achieve convergence. RESULTS: Twenty-nine provisional statements were included in the original draft. In the first voting round, consensus was reached on 15 statements. Of the 14 statements that did not reach consensus, 12 were revised based on feedback provided by the expert practitioners, and 2 were eliminated. In the second voting round, 10 of the 12 revised statements reached a consensus. The two statements which did not achieve consensus were further revised and subjected to a third voting round. However, both statements failed to achieve consensus in the third round. In addition, during the final revision, one more statement was decided to be deleted due to overlap with another modified statement. CONCLUSIONS: A final core set of 24 consensus statements was generated, covering wide areas of intraoperative testing during CI surgery. These statements may provide u...