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