Cochlear implantation is considered the best treatment option for patients with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss for whom conventional hearing aids are insufficient. We used a repeated measures longitudinal approach to evaluate speech recognition and patient-reported outcomes after cochlear implantation in an unbiased cohort of Danish adult patients in a prospective cohort study. We assessed 39 recipients before and two times after implantation using a battery of tests that included Dantale I, the Danish Hearing in Noise Test, the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale. The study group improved significantly on all outcome measures following implantation. On average, Dantale I scores improved by 29 percentage points and Hearing in Noise Test scores improved by 22 percentage points. Most notably, the average Dantale score improved from 26 to 70% in the CI in quiet condition and from 12 to 42% in the cochlear implantation in noise condition when tested monaurally. Dantale demonstrated a significant positive correlation with Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale scores, while Hearing in Noise Test had no significant correlation with the patient-reported outcome measures. Patients improved significantly at 4 months and marginally improved further at 14 months, indicating that they were approaching a plateau. Our study’s use of audiometric and patient-reported outcome measures provides evidence of the treatment benefits of cochlear implantation in adults, which may help physicians advise patients on treatment decisions and align treatment benefit expectations, as well as serve as a foundation for the development of new cochlear implantation selection criteria.

Objective: To examine the surgical, audiological and patient-reported outcomes of the Osia 2 implant. Methods: Data from 14 consecutive subjects undergoing implantation between April 2022 and November 2023 were reviewed. Ten subjects had conductive hearing loss, three had mixed hearing loss and one had single-sided deafness (SSD). Warble tone thresholds, Pure Tone Average (PTA₄) and Speech Discrimination Score (SDS) in quiet and in noise were determined unaided and aided. The subjective outcome was determined from two standardized questionnaires: (1) International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and (2) Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale 12 (SSQ12b). Results: Unexpected postoperative pain was found in four cases. The warble tone thresholds exhibited a consistent reduction across all frequencies, contributing to a mean decrease of 27 dB in the aided PTA₄. SDS demonstrated notable improvements, with a 57.3% increase at 50 dB and a 55.6% increase at 65 dB. In noise, SDS exhibited a 43.9% improvement. The mean IOI-HA Score was 3.8, and the mean overall score for SSQ12b was 6.6, with consistent findings across the subgroups. Conclusions: The Osia device emerges as a promising recommendation for individuals with conductive or mixed hearing loss, possibly also for those with SSD. Its safety and efficacy profile aligns with the broader category of active transcutaneous devices, demonstrating a reduced risk of wound infection compared to percutaneous alternatives. Both audiological assessments and subjective evaluations revealed positive outcomes.