Validity and reliability of the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL)-35 Profile and CIQOL-10 Global instruments in comparison to legacy instruments
- PMID: 33735907
- PMCID: PMC8222065
- DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001022
Validity and reliability of the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL)-35 Profile and CIQOL-10 Global instruments in comparison to legacy instruments
Abstract
Objective: Validated and reliable patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may provide a comprehensive and accurate assessment of the real-world experiences of cochlear implant (CI) users and complement information obtained from speech recognition outcomes. To address this unmet clinical need, the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL)-35 Profile instrument and CIQOL-10 Global measure were developed according to the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System (PROMIS) and COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. The CIQOL-35 Profile consists of 35 items in six domain constructs (communication, emotional, entertainment, environment, listening effort, and social) and the CIQOL-10 Global contains 10 items that provide an overall CIQOL score. The present study compares psychometric properties of the newly developed CIQOL instruments to two legacy PROMs commonly used in adult CI users.
Design: Using a prospective cohort design, a sample of 334 adult CI users recruited from across the United States provided responses to (1) the CIQOL instruments; (2) a CI-specific PROM (Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, NCIQ); and (3) a general-health PROM (Health Utilities Index 3 [HUI-3]). Responses were obtained again after 1 mo. The reliability and validity of the CIQOL-35 Profile and CIQOL-10 Global instruments were compared with the legacy PROMs (NCIQ and HUI-3). Psychometric properties and construct validity of each instrument were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis, item response theory (IRT), and test-retest reliability (using Pearson's correlations), where appropriate.
Results: All six CIQOL-35 Profile domains and the CIQOL-10 Global instrument demonstrated adequate to strong construct validity. The majority of the NCIQ subdomains and NCIQ total score had substantial confirmatory factor analysis model misfit, representing poor construct validity. Therefore, IRT analysis could only be applied to the basic sound performance and activity limitation subdomains of the NCIQ. IRT results showed strong psychometric properties for all CIQOL-35 Profile domains, the CIQOL-10 Global instrument, and the basic sound performance and activity limitation subdomains of the NCIQ. Test-retest reliability was strong for the CIQOL-35 Profile, CIQOL-10 Global, and NCIQ, but moderate to weak for the HUI-3; the hearing score of the HUI-3 demonstrated the weakest reliability.
Conclusion: The CIQOL-35 Profile and CIQOL-10 Global are more psychometrically sound and comprehensive than the NCIQ and the HUI-3 for assessing QOL in adult CI users. Due to poor reliability, we do not recommend using the HUI-3 to measure QOL in this population. With validation and psychometric analyses complete, the CIQOL-35 Profile measure and CIQOL-10 Global instrument are now ready for use in clinical and research settings to measure QOL and real-world functional abilities of adult CI users.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Development and Implementation of the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL) Functional Staging System.Laryngoscope. 2022 Nov;132 Suppl 12(Suppl 12):S1-S13. doi: 10.1002/lary.30381. Epub 2022 Sep 9. Laryngoscope. 2022. PMID: 36082873 Free PMC article.
-
Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL): Development of a Profile Instrument (CIQOL-35 Profile) and a Global Measure (CIQOL-10 Global).J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Sep 20;62(9):3554-3563. doi: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-H-19-0142. Epub 2019 Sep 4. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019. PMID: 31479616 Free PMC article.
-
Understanding Patient Expectations Before Implantation Using the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life-Expectations Instrument.JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022 Sep 1;148(9):870-878. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2022.2292. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022. PMID: 35951334 Free PMC article.
-
A review of preference-based measures for the assessment of quality of life in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy.Qual Life Res. 2018 Jul;27(7):1781-1799. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1837-0. Epub 2018 Mar 22. Qual Life Res. 2018. PMID: 29569017
-
Outcomes and patient-based hearing status in conductive hearing loss.Laryngoscope. 2001 Nov;111(11 Pt 2 Suppl 98):1-21. doi: 10.1002/lary.5541111401. Laryngoscope. 2001. PMID: 11802001 Review.
Cited by
-
QoL, CIs, QALYs, and Individualized Rehabilitation: The Clinical and Practical Benefits of Regularly Assessing the Quality of Life of Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Oct 10;20(20):6906. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20206906. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023. PMID: 37887644 Free PMC article.
-
Functional Outcomes and Quality of Life after Cochlear Implantation in Patients with Long-Term Deafness.J Clin Med. 2022 Aug 31;11(17):5156. doi: 10.3390/jcm11175156. J Clin Med. 2022. PMID: 36079089 Free PMC article.
-
Mythbusters! The Truth about Common Misconceptions in Cochlear Implantation.Semin Hear. 2021 Dec 9;42(4):352-364. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1739368. eCollection 2021 Nov. Semin Hear. 2021. PMID: 34912163 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Evaluation of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire in Danish.Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2025 Jan 22;29(1):1-8. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1788598. eCollection 2025 Jan. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2025. PMID: 39845141 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Social Life.Otol Neurotol. 2024 Feb 1;45(2):e78-e83. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000004068. Epub 2023 Dec 12. Otol Neurotol. 2024. PMID: 38082459 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Arnoldner C, Lin VY, Bresler R, Kaider A, Kuthubutheen J, Shipp D, & Chen JM (2014). Quality of life in cochlear implantees: comparing utility values obtained through the Medical Outcome Study Short-Form Survey-6D and the Health Utility Index Mark 3. Laryngoscope, 124(11), 2586–2590. 10.1002/lary.24648 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Bureau USC (2010). Geographic Terms and Concepts - Census Divisions and Census Region. Retrieved Nov. 14 from https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/gtc/gtc_census_divreg.html
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical