Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Operational message
There are currently operational disruptions. Troubleshooting is in progress.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Outcomes after Application of Active Bone Conducting Implants
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Otorhinolaryngology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Otorhinolaryngology.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9031-565x
2019 (English)In: Audiology & neuro-otology, ISSN 1420-3030, E-ISSN 1421-9700, Vol. 24, no 4, p. 197-205Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: A bone conducting implant is a treatment option for individuals with conductive or mixed hearing loss (CHL, MHL) who do not tolerate regular hearing aids, and for individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD). An active bone conducting implant (ABCI) was introduced in 2012 with indication in CHL, MHL, and SSD, and it is still the only ABCI available. With complete implantation of the active transducer and consequent intact skin, a decrease in infections, skin overgrowth, and implant losses, all common disadvantages with earlier passive bone conducting implants, could be expected. Our Ear, Nose and Throat Department, a secondary care center for otosurgery that covers a population of approximately 365,000 inhabitants, was approved to implant ABCIs in 2012.

Objectives: Our aim was to conduct an evaluation of audiological and subjective outcomes after ABCIs.

Method: A cohort study with retrospective and prospective data collection was performed.The first 20 consecutive patients operated with an ABCI were asked for informed consent. The main outcome measures werepure tone and speech audiometry and the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI).

Results: Seventeen patients accepted to participate and 15 were able to complete all parts. Six patients had CHL or MHL. In this group the pure tone audiometry tests are comparable with an average functional hearing gain of 29.8 dB HL. With bilateral hearing, the mean Word Recognition Score (WRS) in noise was 35.7% unaided and 62.7% aided. Ten patients had the indication SSD. With the hearing ear blocked, the pure tone average was >101 dB HL, compared to 29.3 dB HL in sound field aided. With bilateral hearing, the mean WRS in noise was 59.7% unaided and 72.8% aided. The mean of the total GBI score was 42.1 in the group with CHL or MHL and 20.6 in the group with SSD.

Conclusions: The patients benefit from their implants in terms of quality of life, and there is a substantial hearing gain from the implant for patients with conductive or MHL. Patients with SSD benefit less from the implant than other diagnoses but the positive outcomes are comparable to other options for this group.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
S. Karger, 2019. Vol. 24, no 4, p. 197-205
Keywords [en]
Active hearing implant, Audiometry, Bone conducting implant, Questionnaires, Single-sided deafness
National Category
Otorhinolaryngology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-169636DOI: 10.1159/000502052ISI: 000539022300006PubMedID: 31499490Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85072233314OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-169636DiVA, id: diva2:1423121
Available from: 2020-04-14 Created: 2020-04-14 Last updated: 2020-06-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Koro, EleonorWerner, Mimmi

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Koro, EleonorWerner, Mimmi
By organisation
Otorhinolaryngology
In the same journal
Audiology & neuro-otology
Otorhinolaryngology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 305 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf