scholarly journals Audiological Performance of ADHEAR Systems in Simulated Conductive Hearing Loss: A Case Series with a Review of the Existing Literature

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-546
Author(s):  
Enrico Muzzi ◽  
Valeria Gambacorta ◽  
Ruggero Lapenna ◽  
Giulia Pizzamiglio ◽  
Sara Ghiselli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Free Field ◽  
Hearing Threshold ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Bone Conduction Implant ◽  
Conductive Hearing ◽  
Loudness Summation

A new non-invasive adhesive bone conduction hearing device (ABCD) has been proposed as an alternative solution for reversible bilateral conductive hearing loss in recurrent or long-lasting forms of otitis media with effusion (OME) in children that cannot undergo surgical treatment. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of ABCD in children with OME. Twelve normal-hearing Italian-speaking volunteers, in whom a conductive hearing loss was simulated, participated in the study. The free-field average hearing threshold was determined and, to evaluate binaural hearing skills, loudness summation and the squelch effect were assessed. Five conditions were tested: (1) unaided without earplugs, (2) unaided with bilateral earplugs, (3) aided right ear with bilateral earplugs, (4) aided left ear with bilateral earplugs, and (5) bilateral aid with bilateral earplugs. Post-hoc analysis showed a significant statistical difference between plugged, unplugged, and each aided condition. The main results were a better loudness summation and a substantial improvement of the squelch effect in the bilaterally aided. Our results suggest that ABCD is a valid treatment for patients with conductive hearing loss that cannot undergo bone conduction implant surgery. It is also important to consider bilateral aids in order to deal with situations in which binaural hearing is fundamental.

Sound Localization in Patients With Congenital Unilateral Conductive Hearing Loss With a Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implant

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 318-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erich Vyskocil ◽  
Rudolfs Liepins ◽  
Alexandra Kaider ◽  
Michaela Blineder ◽  
Sasan Hamzavi
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Bone Conduction Implant ◽  
Conductive Hearing

One-Year Follow-Up in Children with Conductive Hearing Loss Using ADHEAR

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Mario E. Zernotti ◽  
Elvira Alvarado ◽  
Maximo Zernotti ◽  
Natalia Claveria ◽  
Maria F. Di Gregorio
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
User Satisfaction ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Free Field ◽  
Aural Atresia ◽  
Published Evidence ◽  
Conductive Hearing ◽  
Subjective Outcomes

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The ADHEAR™ system (MED-EL, Innsbruck, Austria) is a nonsurgical bone conduction device (BCD) to treat conductive hearing loss (CHL) and single-sided deafness. In contrast to the nonsurgical alternatives on headbands or spectacle frames, the audio processor of ADHEAR is placed retroauricularly on an adhesive adapter. The published evidence on the performance of this system is limited to studies with a trial period of 2–8 weeks. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> This study assesses audiological and subjective outcomes over a period of 12 months, on patients with congenital aural atresia (CAA) using the ADHEAR hearing system. <b><i>Method:</i></b> Fifteen children (mean age: 9.4 ± 4 years; range: 5–16 years) diagnosed with CAA (7 uni/8 bilateral) were included in this prospective, observational, repeated-measures study. Each subject used ADHEAR for 1 year, and the performance was evaluated after 1, 6, and 12 months. Free-field audiometry and speech discrimination tests were performed, and hearing-, general health- and device-specific questionnaires were used. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The unaided sound field threshold improved from an average PTA4 of 63.6 ± 3.4 dB HL to an aided average PTA4 of 29.3 ± 3.0 dB HL after 1 month of device use. The word recognition score (WRS) improved from an average of 27.9 ± 15.9% unaided to an aided average WRS of 91.3 ± 4.4% (<i>p</i> = 0.0003) after 1 month, 92.0 ± 4.1% (<i>p</i> = 0.0002) after 6 months, and 92.7 ± 5.3% (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.0001) after 12 months using the ADHEAR system compared to the unaided condition for all 3 time points. The improvements in the speech in noise at 1, 6, and 12 months were as well consistent over time. The average improvement at the signal to noise ratio (SNR) of +5 dB was 58% and 53% at the SNR of +0 dB. No complications were reported, and all patients continued to use the ADHEAR after the study end. The questionnaire results revealed high user satisfaction and an average wearing time of 12 h per day. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> This 12-month trial of the nonsurgical adhesive BCD in CAA patients showed sufficient and reliable audiological and subjective outcomes, long wearing time, and high acceptance. The ADHEAR can be considered a suitable option to treat children with CAA for the given indication, without the drawbacks of nonsurgical devices that use pressure for retention of the audio processor or the costs and possible complications involved with a surgical alternative.

Conductive Hearing Loss and Bone Conduction Devices: Restored Binaural Hearing?

2011 ◽  
pp. 84-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martijn J.H. Agterberg ◽  
Myrthe K.S. Hol ◽  
Cor W.R.J. Cremers ◽  
Emmanuel A.M. Mylanus ◽  
John van Opstal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Conductive Hearing

First experiences with bone conduction implant Sophono

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-108
Author(s):  
Lukáš Varga ◽  
Branislava Bercíková ◽  
Zuzana Kabátová ◽  
Milan Profant
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Detailed Knowledge ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction Implant ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Conductive Hearing

ntroduction: Bone conduction implants are currently used for rehabilitation of conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as for single sided deafness. A growing number of these implants available on the market increases requirements on detailed knowledge on their technical properties, and on their advantages and disadvantages in clinical practice. Sophono is one of the recent members in this implant group. The aim of the study is to summarize our first experiences with Sophono at our implantation center in Bratislava. Patients and methods: We present data of the first two adult patients who underwent Sophono implantation. Both suffered from bilateral conductive hearing loss of different etiology. We focused on their audiological functional outcomes, basic surgical aspects and subjective assessment by the patients. Results: In free field tone audiometry with the implant, both patients achieved improvement of hearing thresholds by 21.25 dB and 31.25 dB, respectively. In speech tests with and without noise, we also demonstrated a clear benefit of the implant, which was in a narrow relationship with the degrees of their hearing loss: speech discrimination scores in noise were 30% and 60% in patients 1 and 2, respectively. The surgical procedure in Sophono implantation is relatively simple and does not include any work on middle ear structures. Patient satisfaction with the implant does not always correspond to the measured functional outcomes. Conclusion: The Sophono implant represents a suitable option for rehabilitation of conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as single sided deafness in selected patients. The candidate selection is always based on comprehensive assessment in which the audiological results are an elementary criterion, but definitely not a single one. Keywords: Sophono – implantation – conductive hearing loss

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
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document