This mixed-methods study explores audiologists' perspectives on remote programming (RP) for cochlear implants (CIs) and compares patient satisfaction between initial activation and follow-up sessions.
Audiologists offering cochlear implant programming should monitor this evidence; if patient satisfaction is comparable between remote and in-person sessions, expanding remote programming may be clinically justified and improve access.
Demonstrating equivalent patient satisfaction with remote cochlear implant programming supports expansion of teleaudiology services, particularly for patients in rural or underserved areas.
- 01Study used a mixed-methods design combining quantitative satisfaction data and qualitative audiologist experiences.
- 02Compared patient satisfaction between in-person and remote cochlear implant programming sessions.
- 03Published in International Journal of Audiology (PMID 42324720).
- 04Audiologist perspectives on remote programming workflows were also captured.
- 05Findings are relevant to teleaudiology service expansion and cochlear implant follow-up care models.
Patient satisfaction with remote cochlear implant programming is comparable to in-person programming.
studypartially supportedAudiologists have identifiable experiences (positive and/or negative) with remote cochlear implant programming workflows.
studyunclear- PMID
- 42324720
- DOI
- 10.1080/14992027.2025.2537695.
- Journal
- International Journal of Audiology
- Publication type
- research_article
- Evidence level
- 2b
- Population
- Audiologists performing cochlear implant programming and their patients receiving remote or in-person programming sessions
- Intervention
- Remote programming of cochlear implants
- Comparator
- In-person cochlear implant programming
Primary outcomes
Patient satisfaction with remote vs. in-person cochlear implant programming; Audiologist experiences with remote programming