Cochlear implant referral patterns in the UK suggest a postcode lottery with inequitable access for older adults; results of a pilot audit in five Audiology sites

Figures & data

Table 1. Audit categories.

Category code	Category name	Description
CI1	Referred for CI	Already referred
CI2	Not referred: unsuitable/outside criteria	Not suitable for referral at that time e.g., word discrimination score out of criteria, anomaly in audiogram, audiogram within BAHA criteria not CI, acute illness, end of life
CI3	Not referred: further assessment needed	Needed further appointments in Audiology or ENT before referral
CI4	Not referred: patient declined	Declined CI referral following documented discussion
CI5	Not referred: CI to be discussed	No discussion documented

Figure 1. Percentage of cases of severe to profound hearing loss where CI referral was not discussed (numbers at each site are A: n = 97 out of 195; B: n = 29 out of 109, C: n = 54 out of 184, D: n = 14 out of 83, E: n = 95 out of 239).

Figure 2. Percentage of cases of severe to profound hearing loss where CI referral was discussed but the patient declined (numbers at each site are A: n = 44 out of 98; B: n = 14 out of 80, C: n = 22 out of 130, D: n = 8 out of 69, E: n = 35 out of 144).

Data availability statement

The participants of this study did not give written consent for their data to be shared publicly, so due to the sensitive nature of the research supporting data are not available.