Comparison of 2 Implantable Bone Conduction Devices in Patients With Single-Sided Deafness Using a Daily Alternating Method

Desmet, Jolien; Wouters, Kristien; Bodt, Marc De; Heyning, Paul Van de

doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e31825e79ba

Cited by 29 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The minimum duration of follow-up varied considerably and was dependent on the type of intervention. All studies assessing outcomes after CI followed patients for at least 6 months, whereas follow-up periods were far shorter for studies of rerouting devices, with one study following patients for only 18 days (Desmet et al 2012). This variation reflects the fact that rerouting devices present additional information to an already-functioning ear, whereas CIs require a longer period of adjustment to the novel form of stimulation in the deaf ear.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing Instruments for Unilateral Severe-to-Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the nature and quality of the evidence for the use of hearing instruments in adults with a unilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss.Design:The PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, CINAHL, and DARE databases were searched with no restrictions on language. The search included articles from the start of each database until February 11, 2015. Studies were included that (a) assessed the impact of any form of hearing instrument, including devices that reroute signals between the ears or restore aspects of hearing to a deaf ear, in adults with a sensorineural severe to profound loss in one ear and normal or near-normal hearing in the other ear; (b) compared different devices or compared a device with placebo or the unaided condition; (c) measured outcomes in terms of speech perception, spatial listening, or quality of life; (d) were prospective controlled or observational studies. Studies that met prospectively defined criteria were subjected to random effects meta-analyses.Results:Twenty-seven studies reported in 30 articles were included. The evidence was graded as low-to-moderate quality having been obtained primarily from observational before-after comparisons. The meta-analysis identified statistically significant benefits to speech perception in noise for devices that rerouted the speech signals of interest from the worse ear to the better ear using either air or bone conduction (mean benefit, 2.5 dB). However, these devices also degraded speech understanding significantly and to a similar extent (mean deficit, 3.1 dB) when noise was rerouted to the better ear. Data on the effects of cochlear implantation on speech perception could not be pooled as the prospectively defined criteria for meta-analysis were not met. Inconsistency in the assessment of outcomes relating to sound localization also precluded the synthesis of evidence across studies. Evidence for the relative efficacy of different devices was sparse but a statistically significant advantage was observed for rerouting speech signals using abutment-mounted bone conduction devices when compared with outcomes after preoperative trials of air conduction devices when speech and noise were colocated (mean benefit, 1.5 dB). Patients reported significant improvements in hearing-related quality of life with both rerouting devices and following cochlear implantation. Only two studies measured health-related quality of life and findings were inconclusive.Conclusions:Devices that reroute sounds from an ear with a severe to profound hearing loss to an ear with minimal hearing loss may improve speech perception in noise when signals of interest are located toward the impaired ear. However, the same device may also degrade speech perception as all signals are rerouted indiscriminately, including noise. Although the restoration of functional hearing in both ears through cochlear implantation could be expected to provide benefits to speech perception, the inability to ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing Instruments for Unilateral Severe-to-Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New digital sound processors, which have been launched in the past 4 years, have already shown an improvement concerning subjective benefit in this patient group (15). Sound quality and the presence of annoying sounds may also be improved with these recent sound processors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Long-term Subjective Benefit With a Bone Conduction Implant Sound Processor in 44 Patients With Single-Sided Deafness

Desmet¹,

Wouters²,

Bodt³

et al. 2014

Otology &Amp; Neurotology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was validated on the basis of patients filling out the questionnaire without assistance. It has also been widely used, and there have been adaptions (Potvin, Kleine Punte, & Van de Heyning, 2011;Desmet et al, 2012;Perreau, Ou, Tyler, & Dunn, 2014;Perreau, Spejcher, Ou, & Tyler, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was developed using a clinicianpatient interview experimental design. It has been widely used, and there have been several adaptations (Akeroyd, Guy, Harrison, & Suller, 2014;Desmet, Wouters, De Bodt, & Van de Heyning, 2012;Noble, Tyler, Dunn, & Bhullar, 2009;Tavora-Vieira, Marino, Krishnaswamy, Kuthbutheen, & Rajan, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ) Changes Over Time in Adults With Simultaneous Cochlear Implants

Zhang

Tyler

et al. 2015

Am J Audiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the changes over time of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ; Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009) and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ; Gatehouse & Noble, 2004) in adults with simultaneous bilateral cochlear implants by collecting data for 2 years after implantation. Method Nineteen postlingual subjects participated in this study. Average age at implant was 63 years. The subjects' data were included in this retrospective analysis only if they completed both questionnaires. We compared subjects' SSQ and SHQ scores to word recognition and sound localization performances. Results The study showed SHQ and SSQ scores continuously improved up to 1 year postimplantation, with the most improvement occurring within the first 6 months of implantation. After 1 year, the scores reached a plateau. This is consistent with laboratory tests from the same 19 subjects, and they showed high correlations ( p < .05). The present study also showed a high degree of correlation between SHQ and SSQ scores. Conclusions Both the SSQ and SHQ scores improved up to 12 months postimplantation, with the most improvement during the first 6 months of implantation. Both were consistent with laboratory tests. There was a high degree of correlation between SHQ and SSQ scores.

show abstract

Comparison of 2 Implantable Bone Conduction Devices in Patients With Single-Sided Deafness Using a Daily Alternating Method

Cited by 29 publications

References 26 publications

Hearing Instruments for Unilateral Severe-to-Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hearing Instruments for Unilateral Severe-to-Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Long-term Subjective Benefit With a Bone Conduction Implant Sound Processor in 44 Patients With Single-Sided Deafness

Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ) Changes Over Time in Adults With Simultaneous Cochlear Implants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About