PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 5, 2026PLoS ONE0 citationsOpen Access

Evaluation of a mobile-based remote aftercare application in cochlear implant users

View Full Paper
XAXabier AltunaZBZuriñe Martínez BasterraMSMaría Montserrat Soriano-Reixach

Key Points

  • The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a mobile health application, Remote Check, for aftercare in cochlear implant users.
  • Conducted paired evaluations using Remote Check and face-to-face clinical follow-ups with 29 CI users.
  • Administered the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire (MAUQ) to both users and professionals.
  • Evaluated user experiences regarding travel-related costs and time associated with follow-up sessions.
  • Compared session durations of Remote Check and traditional follow-ups and assessed agreement on follow-up actions.
  • Remote Check successfully assessed both technical aspects of cochlear implants and users' hearing performance.
  • High usability ratings were obtained from both users and professionals on the MAUQ.
  • Shorter session times were recorded compared to face-to-face evaluations, showing better efficiency.
  • Users reported potential financial savings due to reduced travel needs.

Abstract

Introduction Clinical follow-up for cochlear implant (CI) users is typically carried out in a face-to-face session in a clinical site. Users must travel to the site, which incurs burdens of travel time, expenses, and time lost from work or education. To help alleviate this, a mobile health application, Remote Check, has been developed to facilitate the remote evaluation of both the functionality of the CI system and the hearing performance of the user. Here, we report the results of a real-world field test of Remote Check with a cohort of 29 CI users across two clinics. Methods Paired Remote Check and face-to-face clinical follow-up session were performed with a cohort of 29 experienced CI users. A psychometric instrument for the evaluation of mobile health applications (the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire, MAUQ) was administered to both users and clinical professionals, along with an ad-hoc survey to evaluate users’ experiences regarding travel distances, travel times, costs, and other parameters associated with different types of clinical follow-up sessions. Professionals were also surveyed on the performance of the tool. The durations of Remote Check and face-to-face follow up sessions were compared, and the agreement rate of post-session follow-up actions was determined. Results Both technical checks of the CI and evaluation of hearing performance were possible with Remote Check. Both users and professionals rated the tool highly on the MAUQ instrument. This tool facilitated shorter session times and had strong agreement with face-to-face follow up in terms of further actions. Users also perceived Remote Check as offering the possibility of saving them money. Conclusion MED-EL Remote Check is an adequate tool for the remote evaluation of both the CI system and the users’ hearing performance. Remote Check may reduce barriers to care, particularly for rural populations.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Altuna et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698435c9f1d9ada3c1fb4fbchttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0326650
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper