OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of electrically evoked stapedial reflex threshold (ESRT) and behavioral programming methods in cochlear implant (CI) recipients with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL).
✦ The floor
Discussion
Signed responses from readers of the wire.
Results are not yet available in the provided description; if the published data show equivalent or superior outcomes with ESRT, audiologists fitting CIs in single-sided deafness could substitute ESRT for behavioral mapping, reducing session time — but practice change should wait for review of full outcome data.
Programming cochlear implants accurately in single-sided deafness is technically challenging, and an objective, reliable fitting method could standardize care and improve patient outcomes across clinics.
- 01Randomized design directly compares ESRT (objective) vs. behavioral (subjective) CI programming methods.
- 02Population is patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) or asymmetric hearing loss — a growing CI indication.
- 03Published in Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology (2026).
- 04ESRT measures the acoustic reflex threshold electrically, potentially reducing reliance on patient cooperation.
- 05Findings may inform standardized fitting protocols for a clinically underserved CI subgroup.
ESRT and behavioral methods can be compared as programming strategies for cochlear implants in SSD/asymmetric hearing loss.
studysupported- PMID
- 42985571
- DOI
- 10.1002/lio2.70601.
- Journal
- Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
- Publication type
- research_article
- Evidence level
- 1b
- Population
- Adults with single-sided deafness or asymmetric hearing loss receiving cochlear implants
- Intervention
- ESRT (electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold)-guided CI programming
- Comparator
- Behavioral CI programming methods
Primary outcomes
Cochlear implant fitting accuracy; Hearing outcomes post-programming