PP808 - Subjective Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation with a Revised Glasgow Benefit Inventory

The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) is an 18-item questionnaire that applies broadly to many otorhinolaryngological interventions but could be modified to be more indicative of quality-of-life for cochlear implant (CI) users. We selected GBI questions that were previously identified as more relevant to a CI patient population and classified them into three novel subcategories: GBI CI Global Outcomes, GBI CI Socialization, and GBI CI Confidence. We then related these new subscores to clinical CI speech perception measures. Our results demonstrate that there are a core number of 2-5 questions that significantly relate to CI clinical speech perception outcomes.

Summary:

Background:  Quality-of-life (QoL) metrics are increasingly included in cochlear implant (CI) users’ clinical care. However, the relationship between QoL measures and clinical outcome measures of CI speech understanding remains inconclusive. A commonly used clinical questionnaire that is administered to CI users is the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI). The GBI is an 18-item questionnaire that applies broadly to many otorhinolaryngological interventions. Previously we identified certain GBI questions and subscores as being less pertinent to a CI patient population. Here, we extend that work by focusing on the questions that are of greater relevance to this patient population and subcategorizing these questions into broader subscores that relate to subjective report of GBI CI Global Outcomes, GBI CI Socialization, as well as GBI CI Confidence.

Methods:  Twenty-eight post-lingually deafened adult CI users completed the GBI in addition to clinical measures of CI speech understanding (i.e., AzBio sentence test in quiet and in noise and the Bamford-Kowal-Bench speech-in-noise (BKB-SIN) test). To quantify the degree of change in speech performance when background noise is added, we created new metric: the AzBio quiet-to-noise shift; [AzBio quiet-to-noise shift (%) = AzBio speech in Quiet (%) – AzBio speech in noise (%)]. We then selected GBI questions that were previously identified as more relevant to a CI patient population and classified them into three novel subcategories: GBI CI Global Outcomes, GBI CI Socialization, and GBI CI Confidence. Lastly, we related these new subscores to clinical CI speech perception measures.

Results:  Higher self-report of CI Benefit on the GBI CI Global Outcomes subscore related to higher speech understanding, as measured by the AzBio in quiet and in noise. GBI CI Global Outcomes and GBI CI Socialization scores related to higher SIN performance as measured by the AzBio in noise. All three novel subscores related to a smaller quiet-to-noise shift in AzBio scores. Only GBI CI Confidence scores related to better performance on the BKB-SIN.

Conclusion: Here we show that reducing the GBI to specific questions, more relevant to CI users, relate strongly to clinical measures of CI speech perception. Indeed, our results demonstrate that there are a core number of 2-5 questions that appear to capture CI patient subjective outcomes. Future work extending this to other clinical populations (i.e., single-sided-deafness or prelingual CI patients) is needed.