This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Proposals (eHealth) (86) Hearing Impairment and Hearing Loss (87) Telehealth and Telemonitoring (2086) Digital Health, Telehealth and e-Innovation in Clinical Settings (556) E-Health / Health Services Research and New Models of Care (718) ENT (Ear, Nose, Throat) (36)

Published on in Vol 11, No 4 (2022): April

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/27207, first published .
Telemedicine for Adults With Cochlear Implants in the United Kingdom (CHOICE): Protocol for a Prospective Interventional Multisite Study

Telemedicine for Adults With Cochlear Implants in the United Kingdom (CHOICE): Protocol for a Prospective Interventional Multisite Study

Telemedicine for Adults With Cochlear Implants in the United Kingdom (CHOICE): Protocol for a Prospective Interventional Multisite Study

Authors of this article:

Helen Cullington1 Author Orcid Image ;   Padraig Kitterick2 Author Orcid Image ;   Philippa Darnton3 Author Orcid Image ;   Tracy Finch4 Author Orcid Image ;   Kate Greenwell5 Author Orcid Image ;   Carol Riggs1 Author Orcid Image ;   Mark Weal6 Author Orcid Image ;   Dawn-Marie Walker7 Author Orcid Image ;   Andrew Sibley3 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by (9) Tweetations (4) Metrics

Journals

  1. Quesada-Caballero M, Carmona-García A, Chami-Peña S, Caballero-Mateos A, Fernández-Martín O, Cañadas-De la Fuente G, Romero-Bejar J. Telemedicine in Elderly Hypertensive and Patients with Chronic Diseases during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine 2023;12(19):6160 View
  2. Carner M, Bianconi L, Fulco G, Confuorto G, Soloperto D, Molteni G, Sacchetto L. Personal experience with the remote check telehealth in cochlear implant users: from COVID-19 emergency to routine service. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 2023;280(12):5293 View
  3. Pai I, Connor S, Komninos C, Ourselin S, Bergeles C. The impact of the size and angle of the cochlear basal turn on translocation of a pre-curved mid-scala cochlear implant electrode. Scientific Reports 2024;14(1) View
  4. Rootlieb J, Polspoel S, Brienesse P, Smits C. Remote self-testing for adult cochlear implant users: the effect of wireless streaming on speech recognition in noise. International Journal of Audiology 2025;64(4):314 View
  5. Sucher C, Norman R, Chaffey E, Bennett R, Ferguson M, Spratley J. Patient preferences for Remote cochlear implant management: A discrete choice experiment. PLOS One 2025;20(6):e0320421 View
  6. Bradley J, Huinck W, Fuller A, O’Driscoll M, Whitehouse L, Soulby A, Greenham P. Clinical Time Savings and Experiences Using a Business-to-Customer Model for Cochlear Implant Sound Processor Upgrades. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing 2025;62 View
  7. Shah A, McCray L, Nguyen S, Camposeo E, Dixon P. Speech Perception Outcomes in Cochlear Implant Users Undergoing Remote Versus In‐Person Programming: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis. The Laryngoscope 2025 View
  8. Quaranta N, Murri A, Denys S, Verhaert N, Huinck W, Townsend J, Swinnen F, Dhooge I, de Klerk A, Mehta D, Brotto D, Craddock L, Hoskam G, Schou I, McBride M, Campbell-Bell C. Randomised controlled trial to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of remote care compared with in-clinic care for adult cochlear implant recipients in the first 12 months after activation: a protocol of the INSPIRE study. BMJ Open 2025;15(10):e094283 View
  9. Nassiri A, Saoji A, DeJong M, Tombers N, Lohse C, Driscoll C, Neff B, Haynes D, Daher G, Borah B, Moriarty J, Carlson M. Highly Coordinated Cochlear Implant Care With Remote Programming: Clinical, Financial, and Implementation Outcomes for the Complete Cochlear Implant Care (CCIC) Model. Otology & Neurotology 2025 View