A Systematic Review of the Nonacoustic Benefits of Bone-Anchored Hearing Aids

Johnson, Carole E.; Danhauer, Jeffrey L.; Reith, Amber C.; Latiolais, Lindsey N.

doi:10.1097/01.aud.0000240635.70277.3f

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are broadly in line with those of a previous systematic review, 30 which assessed the non‐acoustic (self‐report generic and disease‐specific quality of life) benefits of BAHAs. The authors of the previous review concluded that there is limited statistically supported, empirically controlled evidence supporting the non‐acoustic benefits of BAHAs relative to more conventional hearing aids or no hearing aids at all.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Bone‐anchored hearing aids for people with bilateral hearing impairment: a systematic review

Colquitt

Loveman

Baguley

et al. 2011

Clinical Otolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Bone‐anchored hearing aids for people with bilateral hearing impairment: a systematic review

Colquitt

Loveman

Baguley

et al. 2011

Clinical Otolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, failures to achieve normal hearing may still require an external hearing aid. Although quality of life has not been studied extensively in patients who have undergone EACR, at least one adult study indicated that only about 25% reported benefit after the procedure (16, 17). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid vs. Reconstruction of the External Auditory Canal in Children and Adolescents with Congenital Aural Atresia: A Comparison Study of Outcomes

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/hypothesis: Congenital aural atresia is a rare condition affecting 1 in 10,000–20,000 children a year. Surgery is required to restore hearing to facilitate normal development. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes in hearing, complications, and quality of life of surgical reconstruction of the external auditory canal reconstruction (EACR) and bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) in a pediatric population with congenital aural atresia.Study design: Subjects were children who had a diagnosis of congenital aural atresia or stenosis and who received either BAHA or EACR.Methods: The medical records of 68 children were reviewed for operative complications and audiometric results. A quality of life questionnaire was prospectively administered to a subset of subjects.Results: Pre-operatively, air conduction threshold was not significantly different between groups at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz (p > 0.05). Post-operatively, the BAHA group (44.3 ± 14.3 and 44.5 ± 11.3) demonstrated a significantly larger hearing gain than the EACR group (20.0 ± 18.9 and 15.3 ± 19.9) in both the short and long-term periods (p < 0.001). Overall, the incidence of complications and need for revision surgery were comparable between groups (p > 0.05). Quality of life assessment revealed no statistical significance between the two groups (p > 0.05).Conclusion: Although the quality of life and incidence of surgical complications between the two interventions was not significantly different, BAHA implantation appears to provide a better, more reliable audiologic outcome than EACR.

show abstract

“…There is a wide range of questionnaires used for patients treated with hearing devices. The subjective benefit with either transcutaneous or percutaneous BCI has been reported by means of the Glasgow Benefit Inventory, one of the most frequently used hearing-related QoL questionnaires [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Data indicated that patients are more satisfied with their implant compared with their previously worn conventional hearing aid [ 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Functional Hearing Gain with an Active Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implant Does Not Correlate with the Subjective Hearing Performance

Auinger

Liepins

Brkic

et al. 2022

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The functional hearing outcome with hearing implants does not always properly reflect the subjective benefit in everyday listening situations. In this study, the functional hearing gain and the impact on the subjective hearing ability and quality of life were assessed in patients with a Bonebridge. A chart review was performed on 45 patients with a Bonebridge who were provided with questionnaires regarding the hearing quality and health-related quality of life during their last clinical visit. The questionnaires consisted of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities (SSQ) and the Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3). Eleven patients had to be excluded due to missing data. A total of 34 patients (37 ears) were included in the study. Aided hearing thresholds were significantly lower compared with the unaided condition, with a mean functional gain of 26.87 dB for patients with mixed/conductive hearing loss (MHL/CHL). Although patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) scored slightly lower on the SSQ compared with patients with MHL/CHL, all included patients reported improved subjective hearing quality with the BB compared with the hearing situation before implantation. No correlation was found between the functional hearing gain and the subdomains of the SSQ. SSD patients scored the HUI3 subdomain “hearing” slightly lower compared with MHL/CHL patients. Although not significant, a relationship was found between the functional gain and the “hearing” subdomain. No correlation was found for the other subdomains of the HUI3. Audiological measurements showed significantly improved hearing thresholds with the Bonebridge. Most importantly, the subjective benefit achieved in everyday listening situations was superior compared with the previous hearing condition. The lack of correlation between subjective questionnaire results and the functional hearing gain shows the importance of assessing both audiological and subjective hearing quality parameters in clinical routine.

show abstract

A Systematic Review of the Nonacoustic Benefits of Bone-Anchored Hearing Aids

Cited by 11 publications

References 38 publications

Bone‐anchored hearing aids for people with bilateral hearing impairment: a systematic review

Bone‐anchored hearing aids for people with bilateral hearing impairment: a systematic review

Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid vs. Reconstruction of the External Auditory Canal in Children and Adolescents with Congenital Aural Atresia: A Comparison Study of Outcomes

The Functional Hearing Gain with an Active Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implant Does Not Correlate with the Subjective Hearing Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About