• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

When Should Adults with Bilateral Hearing Loss Be Referred for Cochlear Implant Evaluation?

by Varun V. Varadarajan, MD, Michael S. Harris, MD, and Aaron C. Moberly, MD • August 19, 2021

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

TRIO Best Practice

TRIO Best Practice articles are brief, structured reviews designed to provide the busy clinician with a handy outline and reference for day-to-day clinical decision making. The ENTtoday summary below includes the Background and Best Practice sections of the original article. To view the complete Laryngoscope articles free of charge, visit The Laryngoscope.

You Might Also Like

  • How Old Is Too Old for Cochlear Implantation for Congenital Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss?
  • Preservation of Residual Hearing after Cochlear Implant Using SMA
  • New Cochlear Implant Improves Hearing in Subset of Patients
  • Best Timing for Second Implant in Pediatric Bilateral Cochlear Implantation
Explore This Issue
August 2021

BACKGROUND

Cochlear implantation is a well-established treatment modality for adults with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Unaided pure tone audiometry, speech reception thresholds, and word recognition scores are widely accepted as the initial audiometric workup before recommending amplification. At the discretion of providers, patients with moderate to profound SNHL, poor word recognition, and/or dissatisfaction with hearing aids may be referred for cochlear implant evaluation (CIE). Many patients who would likely benefit from implantation are never referred due to poor regional access, unfamiliarity with the technology, and, perhaps most importantly, lack of established CIE referral guidelines. Several authors have proposed strategies for optimizing patient selection for CIE referral (see Table 1).

BEST PRACTICE

The existing literature supports the conservative recommendation that patients with an unaided 3-frequency pure tone average (3FPTA) (0.5, 1, and 2 kHz) of 70 dB hearing level or worse and/or unaided word recognition scores of 40% or less in the ear to be implanted are highly likely to be cochlear implant candidates when tested in quiet and should be referred for CIE. Institutions must consider an acceptable percentage of false-negative and false-positive referrals, as well as their perspective on testing in noise to determine candidacy. If a higher false positive referral rate is acceptable, and/or if candidacy is determined by testing in noise, patients with 3FPTA or worse than 60 dB hearing level and word recognition scores up to 60% in the better ear should be considered for CIE. Additional prospective studies are needed to develop a widely validated referral criteria guideline.

Table 1: Summary of Recommendations for Identifying Potential Adult Cochlear Implantation Candidates.

StudyLevel of EvidenceNumber of SubjectsRecommendation
Lupo et al., 2020IIb100Patients with bilateral moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss and 3FPTA (0.5, 1, and
2 kHz) ≥70 dB HL who are dissatisfied with
bilateral hearing aids should be considered for
CI evaluation referral.
Hoppe et al., 2015IV185The 4FPTA (0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) and PBmax can be used to determine likelihood of audiologic CI candidacy using the inequality PBmax[%] > 4FPTA [dB]-8 for either ear.
Hoppe et al., 2020IV128Patients with 4FPTA (0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) ≤80 dB HL with insufficient aided WRS (< 50%) should be considered for CI evaluation referral.
Gubbels et al., 2017IV139Patients with individual pure tone thresholds (0.25,
0.5, 1 kHz) of ≥75 dB HL and/or a monosyllabic WRS
of ≤40% in the better ear have a high likelihood of meeting audiologic criteria for CI.
Zwolan et al., 2020IV529A 3FPTA (0.5, 1, and 2 kHz) of ≥60 dB HL and an unaided monosyllabic word score ≤60% in the better ear may be used as a screening measure for referral
for CI with 96% sensitivity and 66% specificity.

3FPTA = 3-frequency pure tone average; 4FPTA = 4-frequency pure tone average; CI = cochlear implant; HL = hearing level; PBMax = maximum speech scores for monosyllabic word list; PTA = pure tone average; WRS = word recognition score.

Filed Under: Otology/Neurotology, Otology/Neurotology, TRIO Best Practices Tagged With: cochlear implants, hearing lossIssue: August 2021

You Might Also Like:

  • How Old Is Too Old for Cochlear Implantation for Congenital Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss?
  • Preservation of Residual Hearing after Cochlear Implant Using SMA
  • New Cochlear Implant Improves Hearing in Subset of Patients
  • Best Timing for Second Implant in Pediatric Bilateral Cochlear Implantation

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939