Objective: To study the aspects of the quality of life (QoL) on which music has an impact in adult cochlear implant (CI) users. Methods: Thirty adult CI users aged between 18 and 81 years old with a wide range of patient characteristics and musical backgrounds participated in the study. Six focus group discussions about music in everyday life were conducted and data were analysed using template analysis based on the QoL model of the World Health Organisation Quality of Life BREF questionnaire. Results and discussion: A theoretical framework of the impact of music on the QoL was developed. Music was reported to contribute to many aspects of physical, psychological, and social well-being in adult CI users. These positive effects of music on QoL were similar to what has been reported in the literature for normal-hearing adults. However, difficulties in music perception and enjoyment were found to have a negative impact on CI users’ QoL, especially by causing unpleasant feelings and limited participation in music-related or routine daily activities. Conclusions: These findings suggest that an improvement in music experiences of CI users may lead to improvements in QoL and therefore support the need for music rehabilitation. However, the relative importance of music overall and of specific aspects of music for each individual should be measured for an accurate assessment of the impact of music on the QoL of CI users.

Purpose A music-related quality of life (MuRQoL) questionnaire was developed for the evaluation of music rehabilitation for adult cochlear implant (CI) users. The present studies were aimed at refinement and validation. Method Twenty-four experts reviewed the MuRQoL items for face validity. A refined version was completed by 147 adult CI users, and psychometric techniques were used for item selection, assessment of reliability, and definition of the factor structure. The same participants completed the Short Form Health Survey for construct validation. MuRQoL responses from 68 CI users were compared with those of a matched group of adults with normal hearing. Results Eighteen items measuring music perception and engagement and 18 items measuring their importance were selected; they grouped together into 2 domains. The final questionnaire has high internal consistency and repeatability. Significant differences between CI users and adults with normal hearing and a correlation between music engagement and quality of life support construct validity. Scores of music perception and engagement and importance for the 18 items can be combined to assess the impact of music on the quality of life. Conclusion The MuRQoL questionnaire is a reliable and valid measure of self-reported music perception, engagement, and their importance for adult CI users with potential to guide music aural rehabilitation.

Objective: The Speech in Babble (SiB) test assesses the perception of speech in noise in UK adults. Here, we define the normal range of SiB scores to enable the use of the test in clinic. Design: In each test, 25 monosyllabic words were played in background multi-talker babble. Listeners had to repeat the word they heard. An adaptive procedure was used to determine the signal-to-noise ratio needed to reach 50% correct responses (i.e. the Speech Reception Threshold). Eight distinct equivalent lists were available. Study sample: Sixty-nine normal-hearing adults (aged 20–57 years) with no reported listening difficulties participated in the study and completed the SiB test twice in both ears. Results: Normative SiB scores varied from −0.8 dB to 3.7 dB suggesting that patients outside these limits should be considered as having abnormal scores. No statistically significant difference between ears and no effect of age or sex was found. There was “fair” test-retest reliability. Conclusion: The SiB test is a short, valid and reliable test that can be used in UK clinics, e.g. as part of a standard APD battery or evaluating the performance of hearing impaired patients.

Introduction The holistic management of hearing loss (HL) requires an understanding of factors that predict hearing aid (HA) use and benefit beyond the acoustics of listening environments. Although several predictors have been identified, no study has explored the role of audiological, cognitive, behavioural and physiological data nor has any study collected real-time HA data. This study will collect ‘big data’, including retrospective HA logging data, prospective clinical data and real-time data via smart HAs, a mobile application and biosensors. The main objective is to enable the validation of the EVOTION platform as a public health policy-making tool for HL. Methods and analysis This will be a big data international multicentre study consisting of retrospective and prospective data collection. Existing data from approximately 35 000 HA users will be extracted from clinical repositories in the UK and Denmark. For the prospective data collection, 1260 HA candidates will be recruited across four clinics in the UK and Greece. Participants will complete a battery of audiological and other assessments (measures of patient-reported HA benefit, mood, cognition, quality of life). Patients will be offered smart HAs and a mobile phone application and a subset will also be given wearable biosensors, to enable the collection of dynamic real-life HA usage data. Big data analytics will be used to detect correlations between contextualised HA usage and effectiveness, and different factors and comorbidities affecting HL, with a view to informing public health decision-making. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was received from the London South East Research Ethics Committee (17/LO/0789), the Hippokrateion Hospital Ethics Committee (1847) and the Athens Medical Center’s Ethics Committee (KM140670). Results will be disseminated through national and international events in Greece and the UK, scientific journals, newsletters, magazines and social media. Target audiences include HA users, clinicians, policy-makers and the general public. Trial registration number NCT03316287; Pre-results.

Introduction: Cardiothoracic surgical outcomes are poorer in people with diabetes compared with those without diabetes. There are two important uncertainties in the management of people with diabetes undergoing major surgery: (1) how to improve diabetes management in the weeks leading up to an elective procedure and (2) whether that improved management leads to better postoperative outcomes. We previously demonstrated the feasibility of delivering the Optimising Cardiac Surgery ouTcOmes in People with diabeteS (OCTOPuS) intervention, an outpatient intervention delivered by diabetes healthcare professionals for people with suboptimally managed diabetes over 8–12 weeks before elective cardiac surgery. The present study will assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the intervention in cardiothoracic centres across the UK.Methods and analysis: A multicentre, parallel group, single-blinded 1:1 individually randomised trial comparing time from surgery until clinically fit for discharge in adults with suboptimally managed type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes undergoing elective surgery between the OCTOPuS intervention and usual care (primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints will include actual time from surgery to discharge from hospital; days alive and either out of hospital or judged as clinically fit for discharge; mortality; time on intensive therapy unit (ITU)/ventilator; infections; acute myocardial infarction; change in weight; effect on postoperative renal function and incidence of acute kidney injury; change in HbA_1c; frequency and severity of self-reported hypoglycaemia; operations permanently cancelled for suboptimal glycaemic levels; cost-effectiveness; psychosocial questionnaires. The target sample size will be 426 recruited across approximately 15 sites. The primary analysis will be conducted on an intention-to-treat population. A two-sided p value of 0.05 or less will be used to declare statistical significance for all analyses and results will be presented with 95% CIs.Ethics and dissemination: The trial was approved by the South Central–Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee (20/SC/0271). Results will be disseminated through conferences, scientific journals, newsletters, magazines and social media.Trial registration number: ISRCTN10170306.