Audiological and Subjective Benefit Results in Bone-Anchored Hearing Device Users

Boleas-Aguirre, María Soledad; Plano, Maria Dolores Bulnes; Lasa, Iñigo Ruiz de Erenchun; Ibáñez, Berta

doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e31824b76f1

Cited by 17 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Improvements were obtained for the subscales related to reverberation, background noise, and ease of communication. A nonsignificant deterioration was observed for the subscale aversiveness, which quantifies negative reactions to environmental sounds; slightly worse aversiveness scores are a known effect with hearing devices (30,31) and have been attributed to unwanted sound also being amplified (30).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Clinical Performance of a New Magnetic Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System

Briggs¹,

Hasselt²,

Luntz³

et al. 2015

Otology &Amp; Neurotology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Clinical Performance of a New Magnetic Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System

Briggs¹,

Hasselt²,

Luntz³

et al. 2015

Otology &Amp; Neurotology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our group we have observed an even higher benefit after implantation in the Global score (23.5 %) and Ease of Communication (43.4 %), Reverberation (40.8 %) and Background Noise (41.5 %) subscales, and deterioration in the Aversiveness subscale (31.7 %). Such a deterioration in this last subscale which quantifies negative reactions to environmental sounds is typically observed with different hearing devices because unwanted sounds also are amplified [13]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical, functional and audiological evaluation of new Baha® Attract system implantations

Gawęcki

Stieler

Balcerowiak

et al. 2016

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone-anchored hearing aids are well-established solutions for treatment of hearing-impaired patients. However, classical systems with percutaneous abutments have disadvantages concerning aesthetics, hygiene and adverse soft tissue reactions. The study aimed to evaluate surgical, functional and audiological results of a new Baha® Attract system, in which the sound processor is attached by magnetic force. Twenty patients implanted with a Baha® Attract system were divided into two groups: A—bilateral mixed and conductive hearing loss, B—single-sided deafness, and evaluated during a 6-month follow-up. Parameters analysed comprised: (1) surgery and wound healing, (2) postoperative functional results (GBI, APHAB and BAHU questionnaires), (3) audiological results (free field speech in noise audiometry in two situations: with signal from implant side and from contralateral side). Obtained results revealed: mean time of surgery—44 min, soft tissue reduction—30 %, bone polishing—20 %, haematoma—10 %. Functional results showed: GBI total score—29.6 points, APHAB global score mean gain—23.5 %, BAHU ‘good or very good’ score for: aesthetic—85 %, hygiene—100 %, ease of placing the processor—100 %, stability of attraction—75 %. Audiological results—mean gain for the two analysed situations: 32.9 % (group A—36.5 %, group B—27.5 %). To conclude, the data obtained prove the safety and effectiveness of the Baha® Attract system in patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as in patients with single-sided deafness. Cosmetic aspects are highly acceptable and the idea of Attract itself is important for patients with limited manual dexterity.

show abstract

“…The first percutaneous bone conduction device with an abutment applying the principle of osseointegration was described more than three decades ago ( Tjellstrom & Granstrom, 1994 ; Tjellstrom, Lindstrom, Hallen, Albrektsson, & Branemark, 1981 ) and the Bone-anchored hearing aid (Baha) percutaneous device on an osseointegrated post is currently the most widely distributed bone conduction device so far ( Snik et al., 2005 ). Two devices are commercially available at present, Baha (Cochlear Bone Anchored Solutions, Mölnlycke, Sweden; ( Bento, Kiesewetter, Ikari, & Brito, 2012 ; Boleas-Aguirre, Bulnes Plano, de Erenchun Lasa, & Ibanez Beroiz, 2012 ; Dun, Faber, de Wolf, Cremers, & Hol, 2011 ; Lustig et al., 2001 ) and Ponto (Oticon, Smørum, Denmark; Westerkull, 2011 ). However, certain drawbacks are inherent to the principle of a percutaneous device.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Prediction of Speech Recognition in Noise With a Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing System by External Bone Conduction Stimulation With Headband

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction devices are treatment options for conductive and mixed hearing loss (CHL/MHL). For counseling of patients, realistic simulation of the functional result is desirable. This study compared speech recognition in noise with a semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction device to external stimulation with a bone conduction device fixed by a headband. Eight German-language adult patients were enrolled after a semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction device (Bonebridge, Med-El) was implanted and fitted. Patients received a bone conduction device for external stimulation (Baha BP110, Cochlear) fixed by a headband for comparison. The main outcome measure was speech recognition in noise (Oldenburg Sentence Test). Pure-tone audiometry was performed and subjective benefit was assessed using the Glasgow Benefit Inventory and Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit questionnaires. Unaided, patients showed a mean signal-to-noise ratio threshold of 4.6 ± 4.2 dB S/N for speech recognition. The aided results were −3.3 ± 7.2 dB S/N by external bone conduction stimulation and −1.2 ± 4.0 dB S/N by the semi-implantable bone conduction device. The difference between the two devices was not statistically significant, while the difference was significant between unaided and aided situation for both devices. Both questionnaires for subjective benefit favored the semi-implantable device over external stimulation. We conclude that it is possible to simulate the result of speech recognition in noise with a semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction device by external stimulation. This should be part of preoperative counseling of patients with CHL/MHL before implantation of a bone conduction device.

show abstract

Audiological and Subjective Benefit Results in Bone-Anchored Hearing Device Users

Cited by 17 publications

References 19 publications

Clinical Performance of a New Magnetic Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System

Clinical Performance of a New Magnetic Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System

Surgical, functional and audiological evaluation of new Baha® Attract system implantations

The Prediction of Speech Recognition in Noise With a Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing System by External Bone Conduction Stimulation With Headband

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About