Cargando…
Assessment Protocol for Candidates for Bone-Anchored Hearing Devices
Introduction The technology regarding bone-anchored hearing devices has been advancing. Nevertheless, complications are still often reported, which can impair treatment adherence and lead to discontinuation of use. There is a lack of studies conducted in tropical countries, where complications can...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
2022
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668427/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36405456 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1745734 |
Sumario: | Introduction The technology regarding bone-anchored hearing devices has been advancing. Nevertheless, complications are still often reported, which can impair treatment adherence and lead to discontinuation of use. There is a lack of studies conducted in tropical countries, where complications can be even greater, as well as standardized protocols for selection, indication and evaluation. Objective To characterize implanted patients from a Brazilian public institution and describe the medical and audiological assessment protocols to which they were submitted during the selection process and in the follow-up after surgery. Method An observational, cross-sectional study evaluating the medical records of patients with hearing loss and ear malformations and describing the care protocol through which they were treated. Results The medical records of 15 patients were reviewed: 6 received transcutaneous implants, and 9, percutaneous implants; 9 patients reported some type of skin lesion, 2 reported pain on the follow-up visit, and 3 had osseointegration failure. The time between surgery and activation ranged from 2 to 9 months. The median scores on the sentences, Sentences in Noise and Monosyllable tests were 100%, 60% and 80%, respectively. Conclusion It was possible to characterize the patients who received implants at the institution. The patients performed well in silence and had greater difficulty in noise. Even patients who had complications did not complain about the audibility and sound quality. It is essential to develop a model and to standardize the assessment and follow-up methods aimed at the benefit of users of bone-anchored hearing devices, as well as to enable the technico-scientific development in this field. |
---|