Comparing remote programming of cochlear implants using two methods: portable laptop and remote hosted site

Objectives: Compare two remote programming methods as a clinical service for user satisfaction, ease of use, preparation time and accessibility.

Method: Method 1 (Portable Laptop): A 'Programming Kit' including laptop was shipped to cochlear implant users' homes (N = 20). The audiologist at the implant center used remote desktop control of this laptop to adjust subjects' speech processors. Method 2 (Remote Hosted Site): Eight distant clinics were recruited as host sites to house cochlear implant programming hardware and software so that CI users (N = 19) could attend their facility. The audiologist at the implant center used remote desktop control of the host sites' computers to adjust the subjects' CI speech processors. All parties were asked to fill out a questionnaire following their remote session.

Results: Remote hosted site method was rated higher for ease of use by the Remote Experts (12/15, 80%), compared to portable laptop method (11/19, 57.9%) and is more accessible to CI users of all levels of computer abilities while requiring less preparation time per session.

Conclusion: Remote hosted site method is an easier, more efficient method of remote programming as a clinical service delivery method compared to the Portable Laptop.