Unilateral and Bilateral Audiological Benefit With an Adhesively Attached, Noninvasive Bone Conduction Hearing System

Gawliczek, Tom; Munzinger, Fabio; Anschuetz, Lukas; Caversaccio, Marco; Kompis, Martin; Wimmer, Wilhelm

doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000001924

Cited by 30 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These sound field threshold measurements clearly demonstrate the benefit derived from ADHEAR in the aided condition when compared to the unaided measurements. The current results are fairly comparable to a previous study reporting a functional gain of 24.3 ± 5.2 dB HL using the ADHEAR system [Gawliczek et al, 2018]. In general, comparison of the current findings with previous reports on other bone conduction technologies may not be straightforward given the differences in methodologies.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Auditory Performance and Subjective Satisfaction with the ADHEAR System

Almuhawas¹,

Alzhrani²,

Saleh³

et al. 2020

Audiol Neurotol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The ADHEAR device, a new nonsurgical bone conduction hearing device, has been developed for patients with conductive hearing loss. Objectives: This study aims to assess the impact of the ADHEAR device on the audiological performance and satisfaction level in subjects with conductive hearing loss. Methods: Twelve patients with conductive hearing loss were included. All patients received the device for 3 months. The audiological outcomes were determined using basic audiological assessments, including pure tone audiometry and sound field measurements of pure tone and speech audiometry with the contralateral ear occluded with a specific earplug. Additionally, the patients were subjectively evaluated using (1) the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities Questionnaire (SSQ), and (2) the custom-made ADHEAR questionnaire. Results: Analysis of the measured audiological outcomes revealed an average improvement in pure tone thresholds (functional gain) of 23 (± 4.4) dB HL when the ADHEAR system was used compared to the unaided condition in the sound field. Moreover, speech reception thresholds improved by an average of 23 (± 15.3) dB SPL in the aided condition with plugged contralateral ear. Additionally, when using ADHEAR in the sound field, subjects’ speech recognition scores improved by 32% (± 17.7) in quiet and 21% (± 15.1) in the presence of interfering noise. The average SSQ questionnaire scores improved from 3.9 at the study initiation to 6.6 after 3 months of device usage. ADHEAR custom questionnaire assessments revealed high satisfaction and acceptance of the device with no pain or skin irritation. Conclusion: During the study period, this new adhesive system yielded improved audiological outcomes with high patient satisfaction and acceptance and no reported skin irritation or pain.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

“…However, these speech recognition scores are lower than those reported for bone conduction hearing systems. For example, using ADHEAR [Gawliczek et al, 2018], a gain of 49% at 65 dB SPL was reported. However, that study was done on induced conductive hearing loss (normal-hearing persons) and not real patients like in the current study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Performance and Subjective Satisfaction with the ADHEAR System

Almuhawas¹,

Alzhrani²,

Saleh³

et al. 2020

Audiol Neurotol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is known that a significant number of patients chooses not to use or to discontinue the use of bone conduction devices because either a surgical intervention is needed or the nonsurgical wearing option is not aesthetically appealing [ 7 , 24 , 25 ]. It is therefore not surprising that at least one other manufacturer has presented a new nonsurgical alternative to implantable bone conduction devices recently [ 26 ]. If, as a result of these and similar new options, more hard-of hearing patients will actually use such devices, we believe that the practical relevance of these new devices is clearly given from the clinical point of view.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech Understanding and Sound Localization with a New Nonimplantable Wearing Option for Baha

Gawliczek

Wimmer

Munzinger

et al. 2018

BioMed Research International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To measure the audiological benefit of the Baha SoundArc, a recently introduced nonimplantable wearing option for bone conduction sound processor, and to compare it with the known softband wearing option in subjects with normal cochlear function and a purely conductive bilateral hearing loss. Methods Both ears of 15 normal hearing subjects were occluded for the time of the measurement, yielding an average unaided threshold of 49 dB HL (0.5 – 4 kHz). Soundfield thresholds, speech understanding in quiet and in noise, and sound localization were measured in unaided conditions and with 1 or 2 Baha 5 sound processors mounted on either a softband or a SoundArc device. Results Soundfield thresholds and speech reception thresholds were improved by 19.5 to 24.8 dB (p<.001), when compared to the unaided condition. Speech reception thresholds in noise were improved by 3.7 to 4.7 dB (p<.001). Using 2 sound processors rather than one improved speech understanding in noise for speech from the direction of the 2nd device and sound localization error by 23° to 28°. No statistically significant difference was found between the SoundArc and the softband wearing options in any of the tests. Conclusions Bone conduction sound processor mounted on a SoundArc or on a softband resulted in considerable improvements in hearing and speech understanding in subjects with a simulated, purely conductive, and bilateral hearing loss. No significant difference between the 2 wearing options was found. Using 2 sound processors improves sound localization and speech understanding in noise in certain spatial settings.

show abstract

“…Gawliczek et al reported and validated the use of the adhesive hearing device in 15 subjects with induced (i.e. occluded with earplugs) bilateral conductive hearing loss [10]. In our study, although two patients with unilateral aural atresia were satisfied with the device for an initial period of 1-2 months, they gradually found it bothersome to wear at 3 months; they wanted to use it only in noisy conditions as they had been used to hearing from only one side for so long.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The availability of an adhesive bone conduction hearing device: a preliminary report of a single-center experience

Moteki

Kitoh

Usami

2020

Acta Oto-Laryngologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: An adhesively attached bone conduction hearing device has been newly developed. This novel bone conduction hearing device is placed behind the ear and has an audio processor connected to the adapter to transmit sound through vibrations. Objective: To obtain preliminary results regarding the use of this device, we sought to apply it to patients with various types of hearing loss. Methods: Nine patients aged over 18 years and with hearing loss due to bilateral middle ear anomaly (n ¼ 1), bilateral aural atresia (n ¼ 3), unilateral aural atresia (n ¼ 2), and single-sided deafness (n ¼ 3) were recruited. Results: The functional gain provided by the adhesive bone conduction hearing device for the aided side was found to be sufficient. Although the results on speech perception in noise showed significant improvement for patients with conductive hearing loss, no improvement was found for patients with single-sided deafness. Subjective assessment showed that speech and spatial hearing-related issues were improved. Conclusion: The adhesive bone conduction hearing device was thought to provide a feasible option. Additionally, in patients considering the use of a surgically implanted hearing device, this device is a preferable option for preoperative assessment due to its non-invasiveness.

show abstract

Unilateral and Bilateral Audiological Benefit With an Adhesively Attached, Noninvasive Bone Conduction Hearing System

Abstract: Both bone conduction devices seem to be a valid treatment for patients with conductive hearing loss and minor sensorineural hearing loss component.

Cited by 30 publications

References 23 publications

Auditory Performance and Subjective Satisfaction with the ADHEAR System

Auditory Performance and Subjective Satisfaction with the ADHEAR System

Speech Understanding and Sound Localization with a New Nonimplantable Wearing Option for Baha

The availability of an adhesive bone conduction hearing device: a preliminary report of a single-center experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About