Cochlear Implantation: Phoniatric perspective
"last update: 27 August 2024"
- Methods
Methods of development:
➡️Stakeholder Involvement: Individuals who were involved in the development process. Including the above-mentioned Audiology Chief Manager, Audiology Executive Manager, Assembly Board, Grading Board and Reviewing Board.
Information about target population experiences were not applicable for this topic.
➡️Search method:
Electronic database searched:
- Pubmed, Medline, Egyptian Knowledge Bank, Medscape, WebMD, Google Scholar
- The adaptation cycle passed over: set-up phase, adaptation phase (Search and screen, assessment: currency, content, quality & /decision/selection) and finalization phase that included revision and external reviewing.
➡️Time period searched: From 2011 to 2019.
➡️Results : Seven authors searched five of the best evidence based guidelines. And selection of the most appropriate Guideline was based on having the highest score regarding the currency, contents and quality. The selected one was: The American Academy of Audiology, Clinical Practice Guidelines: Cochlear Implants 2019. It was then graded by 4 expert Phoniatricians, & reviewed by 2 expert reviewers, to improve quality, gather feedback on draft recommendations.
The external review was done through a rating scale as well as open-ended questions.
➡️Setting: Primary, secondary and tertiary care centers & hospitals, and related specialties.
Interpretation of strong and conditional recommendations for an intervention
|
Audience |
Strong recommendation |
Conditional recommendation |
|
Patients |
Most individuals in this situation would want the recommended course of action; only a small proportion would not. Formal decision aides are not likely to be needed to help individuals make decisions consistent with their values and preferences. |
Most individuals in this situation would want the suggested course of action, but many would not |
|
Clinicians |
Most individuals should receive the intervention. Adherence to the recommendation could be used as a quality criterion or performance indicator. |
Different choices will be appropriate for individual patients, who will require assistance in arriving at a management decision consistent with his or her values and preferences. Decision aides may be useful in helping individuals make decisions consistent with their values and preferences. |
|
Policymakers |
The recommendation can be adopted as policy in most situations. |
Policy-making will require substantial debate and involvement of various stakeholders. |
WHO handbook for guideline development – 2nd ed.
Chapter 10, page 129
The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to Decision frameworks
(GRADE Working Group 2013)
|
Grade |
Definition |
|
High
|
We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. |
|
Moderate
|
We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different |
|
Low
|
Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. |
|
Very Low
|
We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect |
