Skip to main content

Table 1 Model parameters

From: The cost-effectiveness of Cochlear implants in Swedish adults

Event Parameter Mean value 95% Confidence interval Reference
Cochlear implant surgery and hearing aid use Proportion of people deemed eligible for a cochlear implant after initial assessment 0.56 0.048, 0.985 Expert clinical opinion
Death from cochlear implant surgery 0.00 Assumption
Probability of internal device failure having an implant revision surgery 1.0 Assumption
Probability a patient elects to discontinue using their cochlear implant 0.077 0.009, 0.206 [31]
Proportion of people who receive a benefit from using a hearing aid 0.50 0.061, 0.939 [5]
Proportion of unilateral candidates adopting a hearing aid and are compliant 0.50 0.061, 0.939 [5]
Device failure Risk of a cochlear implant internal failure1 0.025 0.011, 0.040 [32]
Risk of a cochlear implant external (sound processor) failure1 0.004 0.002, 0.018
Six-month probability of internal or external device failure 0.006 Calculated from [32]. Assumed time to external and internal device failure was similar.
Adverse events Dysgeusia (taste disturbance) (short term) 0.065 Weighted average of several papers [33,34,35,36,37,38]
Vertigo (short term) 0.082
Tinnitus (short term) 0.039
Wound infection (short term) 0.045
Vertigo (long term) 0.014
Device upgrading Mean lifetime of an acoustic hearing aid 5 years 1.3 years, 11 years [5]
Mean time to sound processor upgrade Every 106 months 29 months, 232 months Cochlear Limited
  1. Note: 1. Failure rates were derived from a retrospective review of 235 cases of cochlear implant revisions between 1982 and 2011 within the Sydney (Australia) Cochlear Implant Centre [32]. While internal data from Cochlear Limited suggested lower failure rates are associated with Cochlear Limited implants, these may not represent the average failure rate of all manufacturer’s cochlear implants available in Sweden