Preoperative Headband Assessment for Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing Devices in Conductive Hearing Loss

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. e58-e62 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Rainsbury ◽  
Blair A. Williams ◽  
Mark Gulliver ◽  
David P. Morris
1992 ◽  
Vol 106 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip S. Wade ◽  
Jerry J. Halik ◽  
Marshall Chasin

Clinical experience with transcutaneous bone conduction implants has demonstrated that they are most beneficial for patients with purely conductive hearing loss in at least one ear. Percutaneous bone conduction implants, however, have been reported to provide adequate benefit for patients with mixed hearing loss with bone conduction pure-tone averages up to 45 db hl (Tjellstrom, 1989). The results of 24 Xomed Audiant osseointegrated bone conduction hearing devices (including a clinical trial on two patients using a new, larger magnet [Neodynium Iron Boron]), plus the results of eleven patients implanted and fitted with the percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid are reported. Aided results with these devices will be presented. In addition, general comparisons of benefit obtained with the two devices will be made for patients who exhibit similar hearing losses. Finally, a direct comparison will be made on two patients who have undergone both implant procedures.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 379-385
Author(s):  
Ohad Hilly ◽  
Meirav Sokolov ◽  
Reut Beck Finkel ◽  
Ofir Zavdy ◽  
Rafael Shemesh ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Marques ◽  
A Carvalho ◽  
A Miguéis

Abstract Introduction Bone conduction hearing systems can be applied through non-invasive devices, using soft bands that exert pressure on the skin, or they can be surgically implanted (Bone Anchored Hearing Aid - BAHA). However, these bone conduction devices are frequently not well accepted due to the pressure on the head. Therefore, a new non-surgical hearing system was developed not to exert pressure on the skin, the ADHEAR. The bone anchorage in ADHEAR is performed through an adhesive adapter and is indicated for patients with conductive hearing loss and normal inner ear function. Objectives Evaluate the audiological performance with the adhesive bone conduction hearing device (ADHEAR) in a patient with conductive hearing loss. Methodology The study was designed as a prospective single-subject repeated-measure study with the subject serving as his own control. A 29 year old female patient who had a primary surgery due to middle ear cholesteatoma, was adapted with unilateral non-invasive adhesive bone conduction system for the treatment of conductive hearing loss. Air and bone conduction thresholds, word recognition scores (WRS) and speech recognition thresholds (SRT) in quiet and noise were assessed to verify the inclusion criteria of the study. Aided and unaided pure tone audiometry at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz in free field and speech audiometry in quiet and noise were performed at baseline and after 4 weeks with the ADHEAR. Results The functional gain with the ADHEAR averaged over 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz after 4 weeks of usage of the adhesive hearing system, improved from 55 dB HL to 31dB HL. Speech perception in quiet and noise improved significantly in the aided situation, with SRT in quiet improving from 60 to 35 dB HL, when compared to the unaided condition. Similar results were found in noise. The patient evaluated the ADHEAR system as being useful, and without complaints of skin pressure. There was no adverse skin reaction. Conclusion Hearing performance was significantly better with ADHEAR under all test conditions. Therefore, this transcutaneous hearing system seems to be an excellent alternative for patients who need a hearing solution for conductive hearing loss but for clinical reasons cannot undergo surgery or conventional hearing aids. Furthermore, it preserves skin over the mastoid and reduces the risk of infection. Otherwise it has benefits verified by absence of head pressure and improvement of patient’s quality of life.


2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (04) ◽  
pp. 267-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Christensen ◽  
Laura Smith-Olinde ◽  
Jillian Kimberlain ◽  
Gresham T. Richter ◽  
John L. Dornhoffer

Background: Little research exists to demonstrate efficacy and verification measures of the Baha® system versus traditional bone-conduction hearing aids. This study gives statistical data about 10 children who have used traditional bone-conduction hearing aids, Baha coupled to a Softband, and the Baha system implanted. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare functional gain at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz for infants and children with bilateral conductive hearing loss who were initially fit with traditional bone-conduction devices then progressed to Baha with Softband and finally to unilateral Baha implants. Research Design: Retrospective five-year chart review. Study Sample: 10 children with bilateral conductive hearing loss due to congenital atresia and/or microtia. Participants ranged in age from 6 mo to 16 yr; three were male and seven were female. Two participants were African-American, five Caucasian, and three Hispanic. Intervention: The intervention was the Baha system used in children via a Softband or implanted as compared to traditional bone-conduction hearing aids. Data Collection and Analysis: Single-factor, repeated analyses of variance were run to examine the amount of functional gain delivered by the various devices as well as the threshold measures with each device at each frequency. Results: Participants in this study showed a statistically significant improvement when using the Baha Softband over traditional bone-conduction hearing aids. An implanted Baha has statistically as much gain as a bone-conduction transducer at all frequencies tested. Conclusions: The Baha system is a valid treatment in conductive hearing loss via a Softband or implanted. It statistically outperforms the traditional bone-conduction hearing aids and should be used as a first choice in intervention rather than a last option for inoperable conductive hearing loss.


2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 826-833 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rik C. Nelissen ◽  
Emmanuel A. M. Mylanus ◽  
Cor W. R. J. Cremers ◽  
Myrthe K. S. Hol ◽  
Ad F. M. Snik

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document