Better Performance With Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Than Acoustic Devices in Patients With Severe Air-Bone Gap

被引:38
作者
de Wolf, Maarten J. F. [1 ]
Hendrix, Sander [1 ]
Cremers, Cor W. R. J. [1 ]
Snik, Ad F. M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Otorhinolaryngol, Donders Ctr Neurosci, Nijmegen Med Ctr,UMC St Radboud, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands
关键词
BAHA; APHAB; speach recognition; BTE; mixed hearing loss; NOISE;
D O I
10.1002/lary.21167
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Objectives/Hypothesis: A study performed in the 1990s with analogue linear hearing aids showed that in patients with mixed hearing loss and an air-bone gap that exceeded 25 to 30 dB, speech perception was better with a bone-anchored hearing aid (Baha) than with a conventional behind-the-ear (BTE) device. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether this conclusion applies to today's digital BTEs with feedback cancellation and whether the crossover point still occurs at an air-bone gap of 25 to 30 dB. Study Design: Case control. Methods: Experienced unilateral Baha users with the latest digital Baha processors were fitted with a powerful BTE with feedback cancellation. After an acclimatization period of 4 weeks, aided thresholds and speech recognition scores were determined and compared to those recorded previously with the Baha. To obtain patients' opinions, a disability-specific questionnaire was used. Participants comprised 16 subjects with bilateral mixed hearing loss participated. Results: Audiometric and speech recognition data showed similar trends to those described previously, but the crossover point had shifted to an air-bone gap of 30 to 35 dB. In the questionnaire, the BTE was rated higher than the Baha, except by the patients with an air-bone gap that exceeded an average of 45 dB. Conclusions: In patients with mixed hearing loss whose air-bone gap exceeded 35 dB, speech recognition is likely to be better with a Baha than with a BTE. Therefore, the Baha should receive greater consideration when mixed hearing loss is combined with a significant air-bone gap, even when there are no contraindications for BTEs.
引用
收藏
页码:613 / 616
页数:4
相关论文
共 10 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2001, HEARING AIDS
[2]   A comparison of the audiometric performance of bone anchored hearing aids and air conduction hearing aids [J].
Bance, M ;
Abel, SM ;
Papsin, BC ;
Wade, P ;
Vendramini, J .
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2002, 23 (06) :912-919
[3]   Fitting range of the BAHA Intenso [J].
Bosman, Arjan J. ;
Snik, Ad F. M. ;
Mylanus, Emmanuel A. M. ;
Cremers, Cor W. R. J. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2009, 48 (06) :346-352
[4]   THE ABBREVIATED PROFILE OF HEARING-AID BENEFIT [J].
COX, RM ;
ALEXANDER, GC .
EAR AND HEARING, 1995, 16 (02) :176-186
[5]  
Flynn Mark C, 2009, Cochlear Implants Int, V10 Suppl 1, P43, DOI 10.1179/cim.2009.10.Supplement-1.43
[6]   Speech understanding in quiet and in noise with the bone-anchored hearing aids Baha® Compact and Baha Divino™ [J].
Kompis, Martin ;
Krebs, Martin ;
Haeusler, Rudolf .
ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA, 2007, 127 (08) :829-835
[7]   Intraindividual comparison of the bone-anchored hearing aid and air-conduction hearing aids [J].
Mylanus, EAM ;
van der Pouw, KCTM ;
Snik, AFM ;
Cremers, CWRJ .
ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, 1998, 124 (03) :271-276
[8]   SPEECH-RECEPTION THRESHOLD FOR SENTENCES AS A FUNCTION OF AGE AND NOISE-LEVEL [J].
PLOMP, R ;
MIMPEN, AM .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1979, 66 (05) :1333-1342
[9]   Consensus statements on the BAHA system:: Where do we stand at present? [J].
Snik, AFM ;
Mylanus, EAM ;
Proops, DW ;
Wolfaardt, JF ;
Hodgetts, WE ;
Somers, T ;
Niparko, JK ;
Wazen, JJ ;
Sterkers, O ;
Cremers, CWRJ ;
Tjellström, A .
ANNALS OF OTOLOGY RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY, 2005, 114 (12) :2-12
[10]   Bilateral fitting of BAHAs and BAHA® fitted in unilateral deaf persons:: Acoustical aspects [J].
Stenfelt, S .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2005, 44 (03) :178-189