Cargando…
Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss
PURPOSE: Implantable hearing devices are indicated for candidates who could not benefit from conventional hearing aids. This study aimed at evaluating their effectiveness in rehabilitation of hearing loss. METHODS: This study included patients who received bone conduction implants at Tertiary Teachi...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9946869/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36813860 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-07889-y |
_version_ | 1784892427117527040 |
---|---|
author | Ray, Jaydip Wanees, Essam Dawoud, Moustafa Mohamed Abu Elnaga, Heba Abdelhafez, Tarek A. |
author_facet | Ray, Jaydip Wanees, Essam Dawoud, Moustafa Mohamed Abu Elnaga, Heba Abdelhafez, Tarek A. |
author_sort | Ray, Jaydip |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Implantable hearing devices are indicated for candidates who could not benefit from conventional hearing aids. This study aimed at evaluating their effectiveness in rehabilitation of hearing loss. METHODS: This study included patients who received bone conduction implants at Tertiary Teaching Hospitals, between December 2018 and November 2020. Data were collected prospectively, and patients were assessed both subjectively using COSI and GHABP questionnaires and objectively using bone conduction and air conduction thresholds, unaided and aided free field speech thresholds. Outcomes of transcutaneous (tBCHD) and percutaneous (pBCHD) bone conduction hearing devices were compared as well as outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral fitting. Postoperative skin complications were recorded and compared. RESULTS: A total of seventy patients were included, thirty-seven of them were implanted with tBCHD and thirty-three with pBCHD. Fifty-five patients were fitted unilaterally compared to 15 bilateral fitting. Preoperative mean of bone conduction (BC) of the overall sample was 23.27 ± 10.91 dB, the Air conduction (AC) mean was 69.27 ± 13.75 dB. There was significant difference between unaided free field speech score (88.51% ± 7.92) and the aided score (96.79 ± 2.38) with P value = 0.00001. The postoperative assessment using GHABP showed a benefit score mean of 70.95 ± 18.79, patient satisfaction score mean of 78.15 ± 18.39. The disability score improved significantly from a mean of 54.08 ± 15.26 to residual score of only 12.50 ± 10.22 with P < 0.00001 postoperatively. There was significant improvement in all parameters of COSI questionnaire following fitting. Comparison of pBCHDs vs tBCHDs showed a non-significant difference regarding FF speech as well as GHABP parameters. Comparison of the post-operative skin complications was in favor of tBCHDs as (86.5%) of the patients had normal skin postoperatively, compared to 45.5% of patients with pBCHDs devices. Bilateral implantation showed significant improvement of FF speech scores, GHABP satisfaction score, as well as COSI score results. CONCLUSION: Bone conduction hearing devices are effective solution for rehabilitation of hearing loss. Bilateral fitting yields satisfactory outcomes in suitable candidates. Transcutaneous devices carry significantly lower skin complication rates compared to percutaneous devices. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9946869 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99468692023-02-23 Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss Ray, Jaydip Wanees, Essam Dawoud, Moustafa Mohamed Abu Elnaga, Heba Abdelhafez, Tarek A. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Otology PURPOSE: Implantable hearing devices are indicated for candidates who could not benefit from conventional hearing aids. This study aimed at evaluating their effectiveness in rehabilitation of hearing loss. METHODS: This study included patients who received bone conduction implants at Tertiary Teaching Hospitals, between December 2018 and November 2020. Data were collected prospectively, and patients were assessed both subjectively using COSI and GHABP questionnaires and objectively using bone conduction and air conduction thresholds, unaided and aided free field speech thresholds. Outcomes of transcutaneous (tBCHD) and percutaneous (pBCHD) bone conduction hearing devices were compared as well as outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral fitting. Postoperative skin complications were recorded and compared. RESULTS: A total of seventy patients were included, thirty-seven of them were implanted with tBCHD and thirty-three with pBCHD. Fifty-five patients were fitted unilaterally compared to 15 bilateral fitting. Preoperative mean of bone conduction (BC) of the overall sample was 23.27 ± 10.91 dB, the Air conduction (AC) mean was 69.27 ± 13.75 dB. There was significant difference between unaided free field speech score (88.51% ± 7.92) and the aided score (96.79 ± 2.38) with P value = 0.00001. The postoperative assessment using GHABP showed a benefit score mean of 70.95 ± 18.79, patient satisfaction score mean of 78.15 ± 18.39. The disability score improved significantly from a mean of 54.08 ± 15.26 to residual score of only 12.50 ± 10.22 with P < 0.00001 postoperatively. There was significant improvement in all parameters of COSI questionnaire following fitting. Comparison of pBCHDs vs tBCHDs showed a non-significant difference regarding FF speech as well as GHABP parameters. Comparison of the post-operative skin complications was in favor of tBCHDs as (86.5%) of the patients had normal skin postoperatively, compared to 45.5% of patients with pBCHDs devices. Bilateral implantation showed significant improvement of FF speech scores, GHABP satisfaction score, as well as COSI score results. CONCLUSION: Bone conduction hearing devices are effective solution for rehabilitation of hearing loss. Bilateral fitting yields satisfactory outcomes in suitable candidates. Transcutaneous devices carry significantly lower skin complication rates compared to percutaneous devices. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-02-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9946869/ /pubmed/36813860 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-07889-y Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Otology Ray, Jaydip Wanees, Essam Dawoud, Moustafa Mohamed Abu Elnaga, Heba Abdelhafez, Tarek A. Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss |
title | Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss |
title_full | Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss |
title_fullStr | Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss |
title_short | Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss |
title_sort | evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss |
topic | Otology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9946869/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36813860 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-07889-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rayjaydip evaluatingtheeffectivenessofboneconductionhearingimplantsinrehabilitationofhearingloss AT waneesessam evaluatingtheeffectivenessofboneconductionhearingimplantsinrehabilitationofhearingloss AT dawoudmoustafamohamed evaluatingtheeffectivenessofboneconductionhearingimplantsinrehabilitationofhearingloss AT abuelnagaheba evaluatingtheeffectivenessofboneconductionhearingimplantsinrehabilitationofhearingloss AT abdelhafeztareka evaluatingtheeffectivenessofboneconductionhearingimplantsinrehabilitationofhearingloss |