Audiological outcome measures with the BONEBRIDGE transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant: impact of noise, reverberation and signal processing features

Curca, Ioan Aurelian; Parsa, Vijay; Macpherson, Ewan A.; Scollie, Susan; Vansevenant, Katherine; Zimmerman, Kim; Lewis-Teeter, Jamie; Allen, Philip A.; Parnes, Lorne S.; Agrawal, Sumit

doi:10.1080/14992027.2020.1728400

Cited by 13 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Bonebridge, with its Bone Conduction Floating Mass transducer (BC‐FMT) under the skin and coupled directly to the skull, minimises both post‐surgical complications and avoids signal attenuation 1,3,8,9 . The significant benefit in speech perception scores, perceived sound quality and health‐related quality of life with the Bonebridge system is well documented 8,19,20 . Skarzynski et al demonstrated very good audiometric outcomes with a mean functional gain of 28 dB 1 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When this is added to the functional outcomes and the documented high patient satisfaction rates and reduced complication rate with transcutaneous devices including Bonebridge, 3,8,19,20 it allows clinicians to discuss appropriateness to commissioning groups for pa- At the time of this publication, no high-quality data-driven national guidance for implantable BCIs exists. Indeed, a study looking at the quality of evidence in a national policy guidance on BCI concluded that evidence used to define to policy was of "very low quality".…”

Section: Clinical Applicability Of the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Longitudinal economic analysis of Bonebridge 601 versus percutaneous bone‐anchored hearing devices over a 5‐year follow‐up period

Amin

Soulby

Borsetto

et al. 2020

Clinical Otolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Percutaneous bone-anchored hearing devices (pBAHDs) are the most commonly used bone conduction implants (BCI). Concerns surround the long-term complications, notably skin-related, in patients with percutaneous abutments. The active transcutaneous BCI Bonebridge system can help avoid some of these pitfalls but is often considered a second-line option due to various factors including perceived increased overall costs. Design: Longitudinal economic analysis of Bonebridge BCI 601 versus pBAHD over a 5-year follow-up period. Setting: A specialist hearing implant centre. Participants: Adult patients (≥16 years) with conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness, who received a Bonebridge or pBAHD implant between 1/7/2013 and 1/12/2018 with a minimum 12-month follow-up. Main outcome measures: We compared the mean costs per implanted patient for both implants at 1, 3 and 5 years postoperative time points. Clinical effectiveness was evaluated using objective and patient-reported outcome measures. Results: The mean total cost per patient of Bonebridge was significantly higher than pBAHD at 1-year post-implantation (£8512 standard deviation [SD] £715 vs £5590 SD £1394, P < .001); however, by 5-years post-implantation this difference was no longer statistically significant (£12 453 SD £2159 vs £12 575 SD £3854, P > .05). The overall cost convergence was mainly accounted for by the increased long-term complications, revision surgery rates and higher cost of the pBAHD external processor compared to Bonebridge. Conclusions: Long-term costs of Bonebridge to healthcare providers are comparable to pBAHDs, whilst offering lower complication rates, comparable audiological benefit and patient satisfaction. Bonebridge should be considered as a first-line BCI option in appropriate cases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Applicability Of the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Longitudinal economic analysis of Bonebridge 601 versus percutaneous bone‐anchored hearing devices over a 5‐year follow‐up period

Amin

Soulby

Borsetto

et al. 2020

Clinical Otolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In all patients implanted with the Bonebridge BCI 602, we observed improved hearing and better speech understanding in both quiet and noisy environments. The patient’s subjective opinion is an essential element of the assessment, and here, we used the APHAB questionnaire [ 40 ]. The APHAB consists of 24 questions divided into four subscales that measure the impact of hearing loss in everyday listening situations [ 41 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implantation of the Bonebridge BCI 602 after Mastoid Obliteration with S53P4 Bioactive Glass: A Safe Method of Treating Difficult Anatomical Conditions-Preliminary Results

Król

Cywka

Skarżyńska

et al. 2021

Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study presents the preliminary results of a new otosurgical method in patients after canal wall down (CWD) surgery; it involves the implantation of the Bonebridge BCI 602 implant after obliteration of the mastoid cavity with S53P4 bioactive glass. The study involved eight adult patients who had a history of chronic otitis media with cholesteatoma in one or both ears and who had had prior radical surgery. The mean follow-up period was 12 months, with routine follow-up visits according to the schedule. The analysis had two aspects: a surgical aspect in terms of healing, development of bacterial flora, the impact on the inner ear or labyrinth, recurrence of cholesteatoma, and possible postoperative complications (firstly, after obliteration of the mastoid cavity with S53P4 bioactive glass, then after implantation). The second was an audiological aspect which assessed audiometric results and the patient’s satisfaction based on questionnaires. During the follow-up period, we did not notice any serious postoperative complications. Studies demonstrated significantly improved hearing thresholds and speech recognition in quiet and noise using the Bonebridge BCI 602. Data collected after six months of use showed improved audiological thresholds and patient satisfaction. Based on the preliminary results, we believe that the proposed two-stage surgical method using bioactive glass S53P4 is a safe and effective way of implanting the Bonebridge BCI 602 in difficult anatomical conditions. This makes it possible to treat a larger group of patients with the device.

show abstract

“…Various BC hearing devices are used in clinical practice [17,18,19,20]. Most implantable devices are surgically xed to the bone tissue, and it is di cult to evaluate the effectiveness of the conduction medium applied between the transducer and bone tissue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The delivery of signals by vibrations in CC is effective even in the atretic ear, which is different from that in AC hearing aids [15,16]. For patients with aural atresia, BC, or implantable, devices are required to achieve su cient ampli cation [17,18,19,20]. Unfortunately, BC hearing aids have disadvantages associated with their xation style; the transducer is xed with a headband using static force, which induces discomfort, pain, and irritation and has poor aesthetics [18,21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Gel to the Transducer of Cartilage Conduction Hearing Aids Improves Their Benefits

Nishimura

Hosoi

Saito

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gel is a conduction medium used to improve signal transmission and is applied in ultrasonography to obtain high-quality images; however, it is rarely used in hearing devices. The application of gel to couple the transducer to the ear could potentially improve the benefits of hearing aids, particularly cartilage conduction (CC) hearing aids, which deliver signals by vibration. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of gel application on the efficacy of CC hearing aids in 23 patients (30 ears). The aided thresholds, maximum speech recognition scores (SRSs), and hearing level at which the maximum SRS was observed were compared before and after the application of gel to the transducer of CC hearing aids. Subjective impressions of hearing improvement, on applying the gel, were also evaluated. The aided thresholds above 1 kHz significantly improved on applying the gel to the transducer. The effectiveness of gel application was better for patients who reported improvement in hearing. The audiometric results were consistent with subjective evaluations. The application of gel has minimal risk, and its benefits can be verified easily with subjective evaluation. Gel application can be considered an effective option for improving the benefits of CC hearing aids.

show abstract

Audiological outcome measures with the BONEBRIDGE transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant: impact of noise, reverberation and signal processing features

Cited by 13 publications

References 33 publications

Longitudinal economic analysis of Bonebridge 601 versus percutaneous bone‐anchored hearing devices over a 5‐year follow‐up period

Longitudinal economic analysis of Bonebridge 601 versus percutaneous bone‐anchored hearing devices over a 5‐year follow‐up period

Implantation of the Bonebridge BCI 602 after Mastoid Obliteration with S53P4 Bioactive Glass: A Safe Method of Treating Difficult Anatomical Conditions-Preliminary Results

Application of Gel to the Transducer of Cartilage Conduction Hearing Aids Improves Their Benefits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About