scholarly journals The Bonebridge in Adults with Mixed and Conductive Hearing Loss: Audiological and Quality of Life Outcomes

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 90-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr H. Skarżyński ◽  
Anna Ratuszniak ◽  
Bartłomiej Król ◽  
Magdalena Kozieł ◽  
Kamila Osińska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Hearing Rehabilitation ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Background: Considering that hearing loss has a significant impact on social functioning, everyday activity and a person’s emotional state, one of the most important goals of hearing rehabilitation with bone conduction devices is improvement in a patient’s quality of life. Objectives: To measure self-assessed quality of life in patients implanted with the Bonebridge, a bone conduction device. Method: Prospective, observational, longitudinal study with one treatment group. Twenty-one patients with mixed or conductive hearing loss were included, and each individual served as its own control. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) was used to measure patient-reported quality of life before intervention and at 3 and 6 months after activation of the device. At the same time frames, pure-tone audiometry and speech understanding in quiet and in noise were tested. Results: Hearing-specific quality of life increased significantly after intervention and remained stable up to 6 months. Both word recognition in quiet and speech reception threshold in noise were significantly better after 6 months compared to before surgery. Outcomes of aided speech understanding were independent of initial bone conduction thresholds and equally high (word recognition score >75%) across the device’s indication range. Conclusions: The Bonebridge provides not only significant audiological benefit in both speech understanding in quiet and in noise, but also increases self-perceived quality of life in patients suffering from mixed and conductive hearing loss. Together with a very low rate and minor nature of adverse events, it is the state-of-the-art solution for hearing rehabilitation in patients with mixed or conductive hearing loss up to a bone conduction threshold of 45 dB HL.

scholarly journals The Sophono Bone-Conduction System: Surgical, Audiologic, and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

2017 ◽  
Vol 96 (7) ◽  
pp. E28-E33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Mclean ◽  
Irumee Pai ◽  
Andrew Philipatos ◽  
Michael Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Conductive Hearing

We prospectively evaluated the surgical, audiologic, and quality-of-life outcomes in 5 patients—2 men and 3 women, aged 22 to 64 years (mean: 41.8)—who were implanted with the Sophono Alpha 2 MPO Processor. The indications for implantation of this bone-conduction device included recurrent ear canal infections with hearing aids (n = 3), single-sided deafness (n = 1), and patient preference in view of difficulty using a conventional hearing aid (n = 1). In addition to the patient with single-sided deafness, 3 patients had a bilateral mixed hearing loss and 1 had a bilateral conductive hearing loss. Outcomes measures included surgical complications, functional gain (FG), speech discrimination in quiet and noise, and patient satisfaction as determined by the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and the Entific Medical Systems bone-anchored hearing aid questionnaire (BAQ). The only postsurgical complication noted was a minor skin reaction and pain in 1 patient that resolved with conservative management. In the 3 patients with the mixed hearing loss, the mean FG was 13.3, 20.0, 11.7, and 11.7 dB at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz, respectively; in the patient with the bilateral conductive hearing loss, the FG was 10, 25, 10, and 15 dB at the same frequencies. Speech discrimination scores with the Sophono device were comparable to those seen with conventional hearing aids. After implantation, all 5 patients experienced a positive quality-of-life outcome according to the GBI, although 1 of them had only a marginal improvement. On follow-up, all patients reported that they remained satisfied with their implant and that they used their device all day long. We conclude that the Sophono bone-conduction system is a safe and effective option that should be considered for patients with a mixed or conductive hearing loss who are unable to use a conventional hearing aid, as well as for those with single-sided deafness.

Outcomes and Quality of Life in Conductive Hearing Loss

2000 ◽  
Vol 123 (5) ◽  
pp. 527-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G. Stewart ◽  
Newton J. Coker ◽  
Herman A. Jenkins ◽  
Spiros Manolidis ◽  
Marilyn H. Bautista
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Piezoelectric bone conduction hearing implant Osia® - audiological and quality of life benefits

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Joanna Marszał ◽  
Renata Gibasiewicz ◽  
Magdalena Błaszczyk ◽  
Maria Gawlowska ◽  
Wojciech Gawęcki
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Bone Conduction Hearing

Introduction: Nowadays, there are many options to treat hearing-impaired patients: tympanoplastic surgery, hearing aids and a wide range of implantable devices. Objective: The aim of this study is to present the mid-term audiological and quality of life benefits after the implantation of the Osia®, a new active piezoelectric bone conduction hearing implant. Material and methods: The state of the tissues in implanted area, as well as audiological and quality of life results were analyzed six, nine and twelve months after implantation in a group of four adult patients with bilateral mixed hearing loss. Results: In all the cases, no postoperative complications were found. One year after surgery the mean audiological gain in FF PTA4 (pure tone average for 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) was 52.2±3.5 dB in comparison to the unaided situation, the mean speech understanding with Osia® in quiet was 90±8.2% for 50dB SPL, 98.8±2.5% for 65dB SPL and 100±0% for 80dB SPL, and mean speech understanding with Osia® in noise was 37.5%±23.6 for 50dB SPL, 93.8±4.8% for 65dB SPL and 98.8±2.5% for 80dB SPL. There was also an evident improvement in the quality of hearing as well as in the quality of life, measured by the APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) and the SSQ (Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale). Conclusions: The Osia® is an effective treatment option for patients with bilateral mixed hearing loss. The mid-term audiological and quality of life results are excellent, but further observations including bigger groups of patients and a longer follow-up are required.

Stapes Surgery for Otosclerosis in Patients Presenting with Mixed Hearing Loss

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Salmon ◽  
Sébastien Barriat ◽  
Philippe P. Lefebvre
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Stapes Surgery ◽  
Auditory Function ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Air Conduction

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of stapes surgery in patients presenting with a preoperative mixed hearing loss (bone conduction thresholds ≥40 dB; 40 < air conduction thresholds (AC) < 85 dB). Patients and Methods: A total of 30 patients (32 ears) with mixed hearing loss who underwent primary stapedotomy were evaluated. Audiometric parameters were assessed before and after surgery. Contralateral thresholds were also reported. The need for a hearing aid (HA) after surgery and its impact on quality of life were also measured. Results: AC and word recognition at 40, 55 and 70 dB were significantly improved after stapes surgery. Only 16.6% of the patients needed an HA after surgery and reported being satisfied with the aid. Conclusion: Stapes surgery improved auditory function in patients with mixed hearing loss, allowing most patients to delay the need for an HA without worsening their quality of life.

Hearing status and quality of life in patients with conductive hearing loss

1999 ◽  
Vol 121 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. P67-P68
Author(s):  
Michael G Stewart ◽  
Herman A Jenkins ◽  
Newton J Coker ◽  
Spiros Manolidis ◽  
Marita S Teng
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Status ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Long-term Compliance and Satisfaction With Percutaneous Bone Conduction Devices in Patients With Congenital Unilateral 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
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Amplification of transcutaneous and percutaneous bone-conduction devices with a test-band in an induced model of conductive hearing loss

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (11) ◽  
pp. 653-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marn Joon Park ◽  
Jae Ryung Lee ◽  
Chan Joo Yang ◽  
Myung Hoon Yoo ◽  
In Suk Jin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Conductive SISI Test

1974 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent W. Byers
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Middle Ear ◽  
Statistical Difference ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Sensitivity Index ◽  
Index Test ◽  
Bone Conduction Threshold ◽  
Conductive Hearing

The conductive SISI (short increment sensitivity index) test is an indirect procedure to estimate bone-conduction thresholds for middle ear pathology patients. A series of SISI tests are run, beginning at 20 dB S.L. and increasing in 10 dB S.L. steps, until a 100% SISI score is obtained. The following equation predicts the bone-conduction threshold: [Formula: see text] The results of 25 conductive SISI tests on a conductive hearing loss group indicate that the equation approximates the measured B.C. threshold. There was no statistical difference between the predicated B.C. thresholds (12.4 dB) and measured B.C. thresholds (10.4 dB) for the group.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document