The Cros Hearing Aid System

Markides, Andreas

doi:10.3109/03005367909078879

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They observed favorable results when the speech was presented near the impaired ear, but unfavorable results when the speech was presented near the normal ear. Markides [3] reported similar results. He also tested directional hearing, but found that none of his patients could localize sounds.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Pilot study on the effectiveness of the conventional CROS, the transcranial CROS and the BAHA transcranial CROS in adults with unilateral inner ear deafness

Hol

Kunst

Snik

et al. 2009

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the present pilot study is to evaluate the effectiveness of three conventional contralateral routing of sound (CROS) hearing aids in adults with unilateral inner ear deafness. The study included tertiary referral center. Ten patients with unilateral inner ear deafness and normal hearing in the contralateral ear were selected to evaluate three different methods of amplification: the CROS hearing aid, the completely in the canal hearing aid and the bone-anchored hearing aid CROS (BAHA). Each of the three hearing aids was tried in a random order for a period of 8 weeks. Audiometric performance, including speech-in-noise, directional hearing and subjective benefit were measured after each trial period, using the APHAB, SSQ and single-sided deafness questionnaire. Sound localization performance was essentially at chance level in all four conditions. Mixed results were seen on the other patient outcome measures that alternated in favor of one of the three CROS devices. After the trial, three patients chose to be fitted with the BAHA CROS and one with the conventional CROS. In conclusion, most of the patients experienced some degree of benefit with each of the three hearing aids. Preference for one of the three hearing aids was independent of the order in which they were tried. It would be worthwhile to formulate selection criteria; still, we recommend that all patients with unilateral inner ear deafness should be offered a trial with at least the BAHA CROS.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Pilot study on the effectiveness of the conventional CROS, the transcranial CROS and the BAHA transcranial CROS in adults with unilateral inner ear deafness

Hol

Kunst

Snik

et al. 2009

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Neither the BAHA nor the CROS microphone improves sound localization. 6,13,14 Even so, the goals of this study were to improve patient satisfaction and hearing handicap, and so the promising performance of the CI-CROS system presents the potential for great benefit to unilateral CI patients with only a marginal cost addition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, with respect to hearing in noise and localization of sound, the evidence is quite controversial. The CROS aid improves the signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) of the affected ear when noise is presented to the better ear, and this translates into better speech signal discrimination in noise 6. However, when noise is presented to the ear with the CROS aid, the SNR at that ear is reduced, and consequently speech discrimination is impaired 6.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 However, this is uncertain, as Markides showed that the CROS aid impairs sound localization. 6 The aim of this study was to determine if a CROS microphone can be successfully adapted to an existing unilateral CI system as a contralateral input worn on the nonimplanted ear. We hypothesize that such a fitting could provide an expanded sound field to overcome the head-shadow effect, resulting in a demonstrable benefit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The addition of a contralateral routing of signals microphone to a unilateral cochlear implant system—A prospective study in speech outcomes

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A microphone placed behind the affected side transmits a signal to a device worn on the better hearing ear, helping to overcome the head‐shadow effect. Evidence on the efficacy of the CROS aid is mixed; authors have reported both advantageous and detrimental effects on sound localization, depending heavily on the presence and directionality of background noise …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of a new contralateral routing of signal microphone in established unilateral cochlear implant recipients

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Cros Hearing Aid System

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

Pilot study on the effectiveness of the conventional CROS, the transcranial CROS and the BAHA transcranial CROS in adults with unilateral inner ear deafness

Pilot study on the effectiveness of the conventional CROS, the transcranial CROS and the BAHA transcranial CROS in adults with unilateral inner ear deafness

The addition of a contralateral routing of signals microphone to a unilateral cochlear implant system—A prospective study in speech outcomes

The role of a new contralateral routing of signal microphone in established unilateral cochlear implant recipients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About