A bone-anchored hearing aid (Baha) is used in patients with single-sided sensorineural deafness (SSD) to overcome the head shadow effect. Of all the patients with SSD, treated at our hospital, 196 patients used a Baha on trial between November 2001 and April 2010. The objective of this study is to evaluate what factors determine the decision of a SSD patient whether or not to opt for a Baha device following a Baha trial period. 196 patients with SSD were enrolled for a trial period of 2 weeks at the Antwerp University Hospital, a tertiary referral centre. 93% of these patients suffered from an acquired hearing loss. 44% of all the patients (87/196) chose to wear a Baha device after the trail period, either on an abutment or on a headband. The collected data were analysed to determine correlations between the decision of a patient following a Baha trial period on the one hand, and Fletcher Index ipsi- and contralaterally, bone conduction hearing thresholds at the better hearing ear, aetiology, age at the start of the trial period, duration of hearing loss at the start of the trial period and the type of device used during the trial period, on the other hand. Although 66% of all the patients (109/196) declined the Baha after a trial, reasons not to choose a Baha were diverse and no crucial factors could be found that determine the success of a Baha trial period. Lack of improvement concerning speech understanding in noise was the most important reason mentioned by patients who declined the Baha. The authors advocate that all patients, suffering from SSD, should be offered the opportunity to try a Baha device as no factors could be found that determine the decision of a patient following the trial period.

Phase-shift treatment is a new tinnitus therapy that aims at sound cancelling. This technique is based on a theory advocating that the induction of a sound wave with a 180 degrees phase-shift compared to the sound experienced by the patient could result in sound cancelling, likely by negation of the cortical perception of tinnitus or residual inhibition, which can be partial or complete. The aim of our study is to compare the effect of phase-shifting generated by the tinnitus phase-out device between pure tone tinnitus patients (PTP) and narrow band noise tinnitus patients (NBNP). In present comparative study, we explore the effects of phase-shifting during 6 weeks of phase-out therapy in PTP and NBNP. Thirty-five tinnitus patients were included in the study. Twenty-one patients had pure tone tinnitus and 14 patients had narrow band noise tinnitus. The effects on tinnitus were assessed using three separate visual analogue scales (VAS), the tinnitus questionnaire, the hyperacusis questionnaire, the Beck depression inventory, a categorical scale and audiometric measurements. While no differences in VAS were seen after therapy in NBNP, tinnitus increase could be demonstrated in PTP. This increase could be demonstrated for tinnitus loudness (p = 0.002) and tinnitus annoyance (p = 0.014). In conclusion, implementation of phase-shifting did not lead to significant sound cancelling. Our results are discussed and compared to previous studies investigating the effects of phase-out in tinnitus patients.

Speech intelligibility in noise is better with M-BCI than with S-BCI. This was attributed to better high-frequency gain provided by the M-BCI. Improved signal processing strategies may have contributed to subjective preference for the M-BCI.

No abstract

No abstract