{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,10]],"date-time":"2026-09-10T21:53:50Z","timestamp":1789077230362,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":37,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"5","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,5]],"date-time":"2024-01-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1704412800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,5]],"date-time":"2024-01-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1704412800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,5]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Objective<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>To investigate the hypothesis that day-case cochlear implantation is associated with equal quality of life, hearing benefits and complications rates, compared to inpatient cochlear implantation.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Study design<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>A single-center, non-blinded, randomized controlled, equivalence trial in a tertiary referral center.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Thirty adult patients with post-lingual bilateral sensorineural hearing loss eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation surgery were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group. The effect on general quality of life, patient satisfaction, (subjective) hearing improvement, postoperative complications and causes of crossover and\/or readmission were assessed using questionnaires, auditory evaluations and patients\u2019 charts over a follow-up period of 1 year.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Overall quality of life measured by the HUI3 was equal between the day-case (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u200914) and inpatient group (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u200914). The overall patients\u2019 satisfaction showed a slight favor towards an inpatient approach. There was no significant difference in the subjective and objective hearing improvement between both treatment groups. During the 1-year follow-up period no major complications occurred. Minor complications occurred intraoperatively in three day-case patients resulting in three out of nine admissions of day-case patients. Other causes of admission of day-case patients were nausea and vomiting (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20091), drowsiness (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20091), late scheduled surgery (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20092), social reasons (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20091), or due to an unclear reason (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20091). No patients required readmission.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>We found equal outcomes of QoL, patient satisfaction, objective, and subjective hearing outcomes between day-case and inpatient unilateral cochlear implantation. Nine out of 14 day-case patients were admitted for at least one night postoperatively (crossover). No major complications occurred in both groups. A day-case approach seems feasible when using specific patient selection, surgical planning and the preoperative provision of patient information into account. Besides this, the familiarity with a day-case approach of both patient and the surgical team can increase the feasibility of day-case surgery.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Level of evidence<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>1.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00405-023-08352-8","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,5]],"date-time":"2024-01-05T08:02:07Z","timestamp":1704441727000},"page":"2313-2325","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["Quality of life, hearing results, patient satisfaction and postoperative complications of day-case versus inpatient unilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a randomized controlled, equivalence trial"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"281","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0001-4282-2972","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Laura S. M.","family":"Derks","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Adriana. L.","family":"Smit","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Hans G. X. M.","family":"Thomeer","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Vedat","family":"Topsakal","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Wilko","family":"Grolman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Robert J.","family":"Stokroos","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Inge","family":"Wegner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,5]]},"reference":[{"key":"8352_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"310","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AUD.0000134549.48718.53","volume":"25","author":"UK Cochlear Implant Study Group","year":"2004","unstructured":"UK Cochlear Implant Study Group (2004) Criteria for candidacy for unilateral cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults I: theory and measures of effectiveness. Ear Hear 25:310\u2013335","journal-title":"Ear Hear"},{"key":"8352_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"336","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AUD.0000134550.80305.04","volume":"25","author":"UK Cochlear Implant Study Group","year":"2004","unstructured":"UK Cochlear Implant Study Group (2004) Criteria for candidacy for unilateral cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults II: cost-effectiveness analysis. Ear Hear 25:336\u2013360","journal-title":"Ear Hear"},{"key":"8352_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"575","DOI":"10.1097\/01.aud.0000233967.11072.24","volume":"27","author":"GR Barton","year":"2006","unstructured":"Barton GR, Stacey PC, Fortnum HM et al (2006) Hearing impaired children in the United Kingdom, IV: cost-effectiveness of pediatric cochlear implantation. Ear Hear 27:575\u2013588","journal-title":"Ear Hear"},{"key":"8352_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.3310\/hta13440","volume":"13","author":"M Bond","year":"2009","unstructured":"Bond M, Mealing S, Anderson R et al (2009) The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cochlear implants for severe to profound deafness in children and adults: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol Assess 13:1\u2013330","journal-title":"Health Technol Assess"},{"key":"8352_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"19","DOI":"10.1016\/S0194-5998(00)70138-0","volume":"122","author":"JH Liu","year":"2000","unstructured":"Liu JH, Roland PS, Waller MA (2000) Outpatient cochlear implantation in the pediatric population. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 122:19\u201322","journal-title":"Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"issue":"7","key":"8352_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"470","DOI":"10.1177\/0003489418778880","volume":"127","author":"TA Patel","year":"2018","unstructured":"Patel TA, Nguyen SA, White DR (2018) Clinical indicators of admission for pediatric cochlear implant procedures. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 127(7):470\u2013474","journal-title":"Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol"},{"key":"8352_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"95","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijporl.2016.12.018","volume":"94","author":"SK Sivam","year":"2017","unstructured":"Sivam SK, Syms CA, King SM, Perry BP (2017) Consideration for routine outpatient pediatric cochlear implantation: a retrospective chart review of immediate post-operative complications. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 94:95\u201399","journal-title":"Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol"},{"issue":"Suppl 1","key":"8352_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"221","DOI":"10.1179\/146701010X12671177819064","volume":"11","author":"J Stephens","year":"2010","unstructured":"Stephens J, Cruise A, Shaida A (2010) Cochlear implants as a paediatric day surgery service. Cochlear Implant Int 11(Suppl 1):221\u2013224","journal-title":"Cochlear Implant Int"},{"key":"8352_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"803","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijporl.2010.04.006","volume":"74","author":"HRF Powell","year":"2010","unstructured":"Powell HRF, Rowlands RG, Lavy JA et al (2010) Day-case pediatric middle ear surgery: from myringoplasty to bilateral cochlear implantation. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 74:803\u2013806","journal-title":"Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol"},{"key":"8352_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"66","DOI":"10.1097\/MAO.0b013e318278bf58","volume":"34","author":"M Teschner","year":"2012","unstructured":"Teschner M, Polite C, Lenarz T, Lustig L (2012) Cochlear implantation in different health-care systems: disparities between Germany and the United States. Otol Neurotol 34:66\u201374","journal-title":"Otol Neurotol"},{"key":"8352_CR11","first-page":"327","volume":"82","author":"S Ganesan","year":"2000","unstructured":"Ganesan S, Prior AJ, Rubin JS (2000) Unexpected overnight admissions following day-case surgery: an analysis of a dedicated ENT day care unit. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 82:327\u2013330","journal-title":"Ann R Coll Surg Engl"},{"key":"8352_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"670","DOI":"10.1017\/S0022215106001320","volume":"120","author":"JR Tysome","year":"2006","unstructured":"Tysome JR, Padgham ND (2006) A comparative study of patient satisfaction with day case and in-patient major ear surgery. J Laryngol Otol 120:670\u2013675","journal-title":"J Laryngol Otol"},{"issue":"6","key":"8352_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"778","DOI":"10.1111\/anae.14639","volume":"74","author":"CR Bailey","year":"2019","unstructured":"Bailey CR, Ahuja M, Bartholomew K et al (2019) Guidelines for day-case surgery 2019: guidelines from the association of anaesthetists and the British association of day surgery. Anaesthesia 74(6):778\u2013792","journal-title":"Anaesthesia"},{"key":"8352_CR14","first-page":"302","volume":"17","author":"K Russon","year":"2007","unstructured":"Russon K, Thomas A (2007) Anaesthesia for day surgery. J Perioper Pract 17:302\u2013307","journal-title":"J Perioper Pract"},{"key":"8352_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1599","DOI":"10.1007\/s00405-011-1818-1","volume":"269","author":"A Ciorba","year":"2012","unstructured":"Ciorba A, Bovo R, Trevisi P et al (2012) Postoperative complications in cochlear implants: a retrospective analysis of 438 consecutive cases. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 269:1599\u20131603","journal-title":"Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol"},{"key":"8352_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"759","DOI":"10.1258\/002221505774481291","volume":"119","author":"SN Dutt","year":"2005","unstructured":"Dutt SN, Ray J, Hadjihannas E et al (2005) Medical and surgical complications of the second 100 adult cochlear implant patients in Birmingham. J Laryngol Otol 119:759\u2013764","journal-title":"J Laryngol Otol"},{"key":"8352_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"540","DOI":"10.3109\/00016480903358261","volume":"130","author":"S Hansen","year":"2010","unstructured":"Hansen S, Anthonsen K, Stangerup SE et al (2010) Unexpected findings and surgical complications in 505 consecutive cochlear implantations: a proposal for reporting consensus. Acta Otolaryngol 130:540\u2013549","journal-title":"Acta Otolaryngol"},{"key":"8352_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1276","DOI":"10.1001\/archoto.2008.504","volume":"134","author":"F Venail","year":"2008","unstructured":"Venail F, Sicard M, Piron JP et al (2008) Reliability and complications of 500 consecutive cochlear implantations. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 134:1276\u20131281","journal-title":"Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"issue":"10","key":"8352_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2016-012219","volume":"6","author":"LSM Derks","year":"2016","unstructured":"Derks LSM, Wegner I, Smit AL et al (2016) Effect of day-case unilateral cochlear implantation in adults on general and disease-specific quality of life, postoperative complications and hearing results, tinnitus, vertigo and cost-effectiveness: protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 6(10):e012219","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"key":"8352_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.c332","volume":"340","author":"KF Schulz","year":"2010","unstructured":"Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, the CONSORT group (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. BMJ 340:c332","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"8352_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.c869","volume":"340","author":"D Moher","year":"2010","unstructured":"Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF et al (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel groups randomised trials. BMJ 340:c869","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"24","key":"8352_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2594","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2012.87802","volume":"308","author":"G Piaggio","year":"2012","unstructured":"Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Pocock SJ, Evans SJ, Altman DG, CONSORT Group (2012) Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement. JAMA 308(24):2594\u20132604","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"2","key":"8352_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"113","DOI":"10.1097\/00005650-200202000-00006","volume":"40","author":"D Feeny","year":"2002","unstructured":"Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al (2002) Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Med Care 40(2):113\u2013128","journal-title":"Med Care"},{"key":"8352_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"249","DOI":"10.1007\/BF02260864","volume":"4","author":"MH Boyle","year":"1995","unstructured":"Boyle MH, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, Hatcher J (1995) Reliability of the health utilities index \u2013 mark III used in the 1991 cycle 6 Canadian general social survey health questionnaire. Qual Life Res 4:249\u2013257","journal-title":"Qual Life Res"},{"key":"8352_CR25","volume-title":"Handbook of disease burdens and quality of life measures","year":"2010","unstructured":"Preedy VR, Watson RR (eds) (2010) Handbook of disease burdens and quality of life measures. Springer, New York, NY"},{"key":"8352_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"840","DOI":"10.1258\/0022215001904392","volume":"114","author":"DM Baguley","year":"2000","unstructured":"Baguley DM, Humphriss RL, Hodgson CA (2000) Convergent validity of the tinnitus handicap inventory and the tinnitus questionnaire. J Laryngol Otol 114:840\u2013843","journal-title":"J Laryngol Otol"},{"key":"8352_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"143","DOI":"10.1001\/archotol.1996.01890140029007","volume":"122","author":"CW Newman","year":"1996","unstructured":"Newman CW, Jacobson GP, Spitzer JB (1996) Development of the tinnitus handicap inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 122:143\u2013148","journal-title":"Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"key":"8352_CR28","first-page":"213","volume":"27","author":"RS Hallam","year":"1988","unstructured":"Hallam RS, Jakes SC, Hinchcliffe R (1988) Cognitive variables in tinnitus annoyance. Br J Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 27:213\u2013222","journal-title":"Br J Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"issue":"Suppl 7","key":"8352_CR29","first-page":"11","volume":"3","author":"O Meeus","year":"2007","unstructured":"Meeus O, Blaivie C, Van de Heyning P (2007) Validation of the Dutch and the French version of the tinnitus questionnaire. B-ENT 3(Suppl 7):11\u201317","journal-title":"B-ENT"},{"key":"8352_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"424","DOI":"10.1001\/archotol.1990.01870040046011","volume":"116","author":"GP Jacobson","year":"1990","unstructured":"Jacobson GP, Newman CW (1990) The development of the dizziness handicap inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 116:424\u2013427","journal-title":"Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"8352_CR31","first-page":"75","volume":"2","author":"L Vereeck","year":"2006","unstructured":"Vereeck L, Truijen S, Wuyts F, Van de Heyning PH (2006) Test-retest reliability of the Dutch version of the dizziness handicap inventory. B-ENT 2(2):75\u201380","journal-title":"B-ENT"},{"issue":"3","key":"8352_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"259","DOI":"10.1111\/coa.12518","volume":"41","author":"J Hendry","year":"2016","unstructured":"Hendry J, Chin A, Swan IR, Akeroyd MA, Browning GG (2016) The Glasgow benefit inventory: a systematic review of the use and value of an otorhinolaryngological generic patient-recorded outcome measure. Clin Otolaryngol 41(3):259\u2013275","journal-title":"Clin Otolaryngol"},{"key":"8352_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"415","DOI":"10.1177\/000348949610500601","volume":"105","author":"K Robinson","year":"1996","unstructured":"Robinson K, Gatehouse S, Browning GG (1996) Measuring patient benefit from otorhinolaryngological surgery and therapy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 105:415\u2013422","journal-title":"Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol"},{"key":"8352_CR34","first-page":"420","volume":"166","author":"RA Hoffman","year":"1995","unstructured":"Hoffman RA, Cohen NL (1995) Complications of cochlear implant surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 166:420\u2013422","journal-title":"Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl"},{"issue":"9","key":"8352_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1291","DOI":"10.1097\/MAO.0000000000003265","volume":"42","author":"LSM Derks","year":"2021","unstructured":"Derks LSM, Borgstein ILA, Lammers MJW et al (2021) Admission rates following day-case major otologic surgery: a systematic review. Otol Neurotol 42(9):1291\u20131299","journal-title":"Otol Neurotol"},{"issue":"6","key":"8352_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"465","DOI":"10.1016\/j.anorl.2019.09.006","volume":"136","author":"DS Lazard","year":"2019","unstructured":"Lazard DS, Donn\u00e9 F, Lecanu JB (2019) Day-surgery in otology: impact study of a dedicated organizational model. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 136(6):465\u2013468","journal-title":"Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis"},{"issue":"7","key":"8352_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1788","DOI":"10.1002\/lary.28346","volume":"130","author":"C Heilbronn","year":"2020","unstructured":"Heilbronn C, Lin H, Bhattacharyya N (2020) Adult ambulatory otologic surgery: unplanned revisits and complications. Laryngoscope 130(7):1788\u20131791","journal-title":"Laryngoscope"}],"container-title":["European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00405-023-08352-8.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00405-023-08352-8\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00405-023-08352-8.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,17]],"date-time":"2024-04-17T07:05:34Z","timestamp":1713337534000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00405-023-08352-8"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,5]]},"references-count":37,"journal-issue":{"issue":"5","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,5]]}},"alternative-id":["8352"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00405-023-08352-8","relation":{},"ISSN":["0937-4477","1434-4726"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0937-4477","type":"print"},{"value":"1434-4726","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,5]]},"assertion":[{"value":"22 August 2023","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"13 November 2023","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"5 January 2024","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"None reported.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical approval"}}]}}