A Comparison Between Wireless CROS and Bone-anchored Hearing Devices for Single-sided Deafness: A Pilot Study

被引:1
作者
Finbow, Jennifer [1 ]
Bance, Manohar [1 ,2 ]
Aiken, Steve [1 ]
Gulliver, Mark [3 ]
Verge, Janine [3 ]
Caissie, Rachel [1 ]
机构
[1] Dalhousie Univ, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada
[2] QEII Hlth Sci Ctr, Halifax, NS, Canada
[3] Nova Scotia Hearing & Speech Ctr, Halifax, NS, Canada
关键词
BAHD; Bone-anchored hearing device; Contralateral routing of signals; CROS; Single-sided deafness; Unilateral hearing loss; INNER-EAR DEAFNESS; UNILATERAL DEAFNESS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; SIGNAL AMPLIFICATION; BINAURAL HEARING; CONDUCTED SOUND; AIDS; REHABILITATION; BENEFIT; BAHA;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Introduction: This study compared wireless Contralateral Routing of Signals (CROS) hearing aid and bone-anchored hearing device (BAHD) in patients with single-sided deafness. Methods: Eight adults with single-sided deafness previously implanted with a BAHD were given a 2-week trial with a CROS hearing aid and tested in unaided and aided conditions. Both devices were compared on head shadow effect reduction, speech perception measures in quiet and in noise, self-assessment questionnaires, and daily diaries. Results: Both the CROS and BAHD significantly reduced the head shadow effect. QuickSIN scores were significantly better with noise presented to the poorer ear, as compared to the better ear, for the unaided condition, the BAHD, and the CROS. Scores showed no significant differences between the CROS and BAHD with noise presented to the better ear, but scores with the CROS were significantly poorer than in the unaided condition with noise presented to the poorer ear. There were no significant differences between BAHD and CROS for the ratings on the Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness and Speech Spatial Qualities questionnaires. Both devices were worn an average of 10 hours per day. Four participants preferred the CROS for sound quality; three preferred the BAHD for comfort. Conclusion: Comparisons of CROS and BAHD need to be re-evaluated as both technologies have evolved. In our pilot study, both devices seem comparable, with the CROS avoiding the risks of surgery, and we recommend a trial of CROS in our center for first line treatment of single-sided deafness.
引用
收藏
页码:819 / 825
页数:7
相关论文
共 34 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], LANG ENV STAT COMP
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1988, NONPARAMETRIC STAT
  • [3] Comparison of Pseudobinaural Hearing to Real Binaural Hearing Rehabilitation After Cochlear Implantation in Patients With Unilateral Deafness and Tinnitus
    Arndt, Susan
    Aschendorff, Antje
    Laszig, Roland
    Beck, Rainer
    Schild, Christian
    Kroeger, Stefanie
    Ihorst, Gabriele
    Wesarg, Thomas
    [J]. OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2011, 32 (01) : 39 - 47
  • [4] The evidence base for the application of contralateral bone anchored hearing aids in acquired unilateral sensorineural hearing loss in adults
    Baguley, DM
    Bird, J
    Humphriss, RL
    Prevost, AT
    [J]. CLINICAL OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2006, 31 (01) : 6 - 14
  • [5] Calculating and graphing within-subject confidence intervals for ANOVA
    Baguley, Thom
    [J]. BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2012, 44 (01) : 158 - 175
  • [6] The Current Status of Audiologic Rehabilitation for Profound Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss
    Bishop, Charles E.
    Eby, Thomas L.
    [J]. LARYNGOSCOPE, 2010, 120 (03) : 552 - 556
  • [7] Bone-anchored hearing aids in unilateral inner ear deafness
    Bosman, AJ
    Hol, MKS
    Snik, AFM
    Mylanus, EAM
    Cremers, CWRJ
    [J]. ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA, 2003, 123 (02) : 258 - 260
  • [8] Dillon H., 2012, HEARING AIDS
  • [9] The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ)
    Gatehouse, S
    Noble, W
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2004, 43 (02) : 85 - 99
  • [10] GELFAND SA, 1979, ARCH OTOLARYNGOL, V105, P328