Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40481342›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2025

The cost-effectiveness of unilateral cochlear implantation in the Finnish health care.

Aarno Dietz, Elizabeth Seil, Pia Linder, Ismo Linnosmaa, Bonny Parkinson, Henry Cutler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Aarno DietzDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Kuopio University Hospital, P.O. Box 100, Kuopio, 70211, Finland. aarno.dietz@pshyvinvointialue.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6076-1037
Elizabeth SeilMacquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School, Sydney, Australia.
Pia LinderDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Kuopio University Hospital, P.O. Box 100, Kuopio, 70211, Finland.
Ismo LinnosmaaDepartment of Health and Social Management, Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Bonny ParkinsonMacquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School, Sydney, Australia.
Henry CutlerMacquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study estimates the cost-effectiveness of unilateral cochlear implants (UCIs) for Finnish adults with severe to profound hearing loss within the contemporary Finnish healthcare system.

methodsWe conducted a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model to compare UCIs with hearing aids for adults with severe to profound hearing loss. We developed an average clinical pathway based on data from three Finnish university hospitals to estimate resource use. The model captured health-related quality of life, potential adverse events, device upgrades, and device failure. We estimated unit costs from national expert opinions and from grey and published literature. We performed a probabilistic sensitivity analysis to evaluate how uncertain model inputs affect the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

resultsThe ICER for UCIs compared to hearing aids in the Finnish adult population was €14,528 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve indicated a 98,5% likelihood that UCIs are cost-effective compared to a €25,000 per QALY gained threshold. The ICER was most sensitive to the discount rate, UCI device and surgery costs, the utility increment from UCI treatment, costs associated with UCI fitting, and the cost and upgrade cycle of sound processors.

conclusionUCIs for adults are cost-effective within the Finnish healthcare setting. Our results align with ICER findings for UCIs in the UK and Swedish adult populations, despite differences in indications, clinical pathways, and device unit costs. All studies suggest that UCIs are more cost-effective when implemented at an earlier age, given the same level of hearing performance.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsAdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleFinlandHearing AidsHumansMaleMarkov ChainsMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of LifeCochlear implantCost-effectivenessCost-utilityFinlandHearing loss

Identifiers

PMID40481342
PMCPMC12605616

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.