Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire Research Articles

Rehabilitace jednostranné hluchoty pomocí implantabilního systému pro přímé kostní vedení – Bonebridge

Overview Introduction: Bonebridge is a direct bone conduction hearing implantable system. The aim of the work is to present pilot results of rehabilitation of single sided deafness using this system. Material and methods: Analysis of three patients with single-sideded deafness, who underwent BB implantation in 2018 at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery of St. Anna Hospital in Brno. Evaluation parameters: Bern Benefi t in Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire, experimental examination of directional hearing and hearing in noise test. Results: Questionnaire: Within the visual analog scale in the range of –5 to +5 points, the average rating was + 2.4 points, so listening was rated as easier with Bonebridge than without hearing aids. The ability to locate the sound source was evaluated by 4 and 0–1 points in one and two respondents, respectively. Examination of spatial hearing: without hearing aid, the ability to locate the sound source was signifi cantly impaired in all the examined. With Bonebridge, with a tolerated deviation of 45°, the success rate of sound source localization was 75–100% in the range of 0–360° in the horizontal plane. Hearing in noise test: the greatest improvement in intelligibility (by 30–100%) was achieved with Bonebridge at SNR –5 dB. Conclusion: Bonebridge is not able to restore binaural hearing in patients with single sided deafness, it is a pseudo-binaural correction. Like other implantable bone conduction systems, Bonebridge is benefi tial for patients with single sided deafness in a variety of listening situations. Using experimental audiological tests, the contribution of Bonebridge to understanding sentences in acoustic noise and improving the ability to locate the sound source was found. However, validation of the results would require a larger number of probands. Keywords: single-sided deafness – BAHD – Bonebridge – bone conduction hearing implant – hearing in noise – directional hearing test

Single-Sided Deafness-Outcomes of Three Interventions for Profound Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

A comparison of three interventions for profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Prospective, crossover randomized clinical trial. Fifteen participants with profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Three potential technical interventions were compared: Bone Conduction Device on softband, Contralateral Routing of Signal (CROS), and Remote Microphone . Each intervention was randomly trialed for a period of 3 weeks, separated by a 1 week washout period. Speech in noise recognition test performed under four conditions (lateral noise poorer ear, lateral noise better ear, speech poorer ear, speech better ear). Standardized questionnaires (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, Bern Benefit in Single Sided Deafness Questionnaire, and Speech, Spatial, and Other Qualities 12) were used to evaluate amplification benefit at baseline and following each intervention. The use of remote microphone provided the best results in the speech recognition in noise test. A benefit in some signal-to-noise ratios was presented of the CROS over bone conduction device on softband in the Speech Poor Ear condition. On questionnaires of benefit, participants did not rate a particular intervention as significantly better than any other. Following the study, CROS was the intervention preferred by the 8 of 15 participants (53%). The majority of participants (80%) chose to continue with an intervention rather than no treatment. The use of all interventions resulted in increased performance in speech recognition in noise and rated higher on subjective benefits in comparison with baseline. People with SSD are a heterogeneous population when considering perceived difficulties. Future research should focus on segmenting the population of SSD depending on factors such as etiology, high frequency loss in the better ear, and age of acquired loss for the poorer ear. This stratification may possibly increase the benefit for the patient in terms of more individual-based clinical routines.

Long-term evaluation of sound localisation in single-sided deaf adults fitted with a BAHA device.

To perform a long-term evaluation of the localisation capabilities in the horizontal plane of single-sided deaf patients fitted with a BAHA device. Single-centre retrospective study. Twenty-one adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) with normal hearing in the contralateral ear (pure tone average <20dB, SDS>90%) rehabilitated with a Cochlear BAHA device from 2003 to 2012 on the deaf side over a median follow-up of 8years. The task used in this paper is a sound localisation identification task with a set-up of seven loudspeakers on a semi-circular array at 30-degree intervals performed at three periods: before BAHA, initially and at last follow-up. Our main criterion of judgement was the root-mean-square (RMS) localisation error. In addition, the Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire (BBSS) was administered. The mean RMS localisation error was initially estimated at 64° without any rehabilitation (for a chance level RMS estimated at 81°). Initially, with the BAHA device, the RMS localisation error dropped to 51°. At the last follow-up evaluation, a significant decrease at 23° was noted. Concerning the Bern Questionnaire, 19% of the patients (n=4) did not report any change (score of 0), 33% (n=7) are satisfied (score of +1 or +2) and 48% (n=10) are very satisfied with the BAHA device (score better than +3). Improvement of sound localisation in the horizontal plane for some SSD patients is likely related to altered processing of monaural spectral cues. The time needed to learn to use the azimuth-dependent spectral cues takes time. Long-term follow-up should be considered for studies investigating sound localisation performance.

Speech intelligibility and subjective benefit in single-sided deaf adults after cochlear implantation

Treatment with cochlear implants (CIs) in single-sided deaf individuals started less than a decade ago. CIs can successfully reduce incapacitating tinnitus on the deaf ear and allow, so some extent, the restoration of binaural hearing. Until now, systematic evaluations of subjective CI benefit in post-lingually single-sided deaf individuals and analyses of speech intelligibility outcome for the CI in isolation have been lacking.For the prospective part of this study, the Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire (BBSS) was administered to 48 single-sided deaf CI users to evaluate the subjectively perceived CI benefit across different listening situations. In the retrospective part, speech intelligibility outcome with the CI up to 12 month post-activation was compared between 100 single-sided deaf CI users and 125 bilaterally implanted CI users (2nd implant).The positive median ratings in the BBSS differed significantly from zero for all items suggesting that most individuals with single-sided deafness rate their CI as beneficial across listening situations. The speech perception scores in quiet and noise improved significantly over time in both groups of CI users. Speech intelligibility with the CI in isolation was significantly better in bilaterally implanted CI users (2nd implant) compared to the scores obtained from single-sided deaf CI users.Our results indicate that CI users with single-sided deafness can reach open set speech understanding with their CI in isolation, encouraging the extension of the CI indication to individuals with normal hearing on the contralateral ear. Compared to the performance reached with bilateral CI users’ second implant, speech reception threshold are lower, indicating an aural preference and dominance of the normal hearing ear. The results from the BBSS propose good satisfaction with the CI across several listening situations.

Long-term subjective benefit with a bone conduction implant sound processor in 44 patients with single-sided deafness.

Studies that investigate the subjective benefit from a bone conduction implant (BCI) sound processor in patients with single-sided sensorineural deafness (SSD) have been limited to examining short- and mid-term benefit. In the current study, we performed a survey among 44 SSD BCI users with a median follow-up time of 50 months. Forty-four experienced SSD BCI users participated in the survey, which consisted of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, the Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire, the Short Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults, and a self-made user questionnaire. For patients with tinnitus, the Tinnitus Questionnaire was also completed. The results of the survey were correlated with contralateral hearing loss, age at implantation, duration of the hearing loss at the time of implantation, duration of BCI use, and the presence and burden of tinnitus. In total, 86% of the patients still used their sound processor. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit and the Short Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults show a statistically significant overall improvement with the BCI. The Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire and the user questionnaire showed that almost 40% of the patients reported daily use of the sound processor. However, the survey of daily use reveals benefit only in certain circumstances. Speech understanding in noisy situations is rated rather low, and 58% of all patients reported that their BCI benefit was less than expected. The majority of the patients reported an overall improvement from using their BCI. However, the number of users decreases during a longer follow-up time and patients get less enthusiastic about the device after an extended period of use, especially in noisy situations. However, diminished satisfaction because of time-related reductions in processor function could not be ruled out.

Hearing Rehabilitation of Single-Sided Deafness: Benefit and Selection Criteria of Bone Anchored Hearing Aid and Contralateral Routing of Signal Hearing Aid

Received March 25, 2013 Revised May 16, 2013 Accepted May 20, 2013 Address for correspondence Sung Huhn Kim, MD, PhD Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea Tel +82-2-2228-3622 Fax +82-2-393-0580 E-mail FLEDERMAUS@yuhs.ac Background and ObjectivesZZThere are two ways to route sound from a deaf hemifield to a functional ear: the bone anchored hearing aid (BAHA) and the contralateral routing of signal hearing aid (CROS HA). BAHA uses transcranial bone conduction; on the other hand, CROS HA uses air conduction. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the benefit of these auditory rehabilitation devices objectively and subjectively, and to analyze factors that affect daily using time. Subjects and MethodZZWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 19 patients who selected BAHA and 9 patients who selected CROS HA to undergo rehabilitation of unilateral hearing loss. Preoperative pure tone air and bone conduction thresholds, BAHA-aided thresholds and CROS HA-aided thresholds were measured. Hearing in noise test (HINT) was measured with unaided and aided in signal to noise ratio 10 (signal 75 dB HL, noise 65 dBA). Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire (BBSS) was evaluated for all patients to assess subjective satisfaction and also, daily device using time was investigated. ResultsZZThe aided pure tone audiometry was 44.58 dB HL, 42.71 dB HL for in BAHA and CROS HA, respectively, whereas the unaided PTA was 111.29, 103.28 dB HL for BAHA and CROS HA, respectively. The aided HINT was 63.03 and 64.06%, whereas the unaided HINT was 22.13% and 37.44% for BAHA and CROS, respectively. BBSS showed more satisfactory results with BAHA and CROS HA when compared unaided in all items. Daily using time did not correlate with the degree of satisfaction, better ear hearing levels or etiology. ConclusionZZIt was found that not only the preoperative BAHA rod test and HA trials but also the customized and detail counseling were needed for single sided deaf patients to use auditory rehabilitation devices frequently. Korean J Otorhinolaryngol-Head Neck Surg 2013;56:339-45

Quality-of-Life Outcomes After Bone-Anchored Hearing Device Surgery in Children With Single-Sided Sensorineural Deafness

To report our experience in a series of children with single-sided sensorineural deafness where a bone-anchored hearing device (BAHD) was used for auditory rehabilitation. Retrospective case review. Tertiary referral centre. Eight children (4 boys and 4 girls) who had BAHD surgery for single-sided sensorineural deafness between 2007 and 2010. Bone-anchored hearing device was used for auditory rehabilitation. Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory (GCBI), Single-sided Deafness (SSD) Questionnaire and change in health benefit scores (visual analogue scale). All but one of the children showed a positive GCBI score; the child that reported a negative score was because of low self confidence and self-esteem issues secondary to bullying at school. The results of the SSD questionnaire were generally positive with a mean satisfaction score of the BAHD as 9/10. All the children had an improvement in heath benefit. Our findings add further evidence to support patient perceived benefit of a BAHD in single sided sensorineural deafness in the paediatric population.

Long-Term Safety and Benefit of a New Intraoral Device for Single-Sided Deafness

To determine the long-term safety and benefit of a new intraoral bone conduction device (SoundBite Hearing System by Sonitus Medical) for single-sided deafness (SSD). A multi-center, controlled, nonrandomized, prospective unblinded study of SSD patients wearing the device over a 6-month period. Ambulatory care centers typical of those where SSD patients are diagnosed and treated. Adults (N = 22) with acquired, permanent SSD and no current use of any other SSD device. Continual daily wear of the new device for 6 months. Comprehensive medical, audiologic, and dental measures; aided thresholds; Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit scores, and an SSD questionnaire. There were no related adverse events or changes in the medical or audiologic findings at the end of the trial compared with the beginning. There were no significant changes in the mean aided thresholds (p > 0.01) or the mean dental measures (p > 0.05) at 3 or 6 months compared with pretrial measures. The mean Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit benefit scores showed improvement (p < 0.01) for the Background Noise, Reverberation, and Ease of Communication subscales and the Global scale at 3 and 6 months. The results of the SSD questionnaire indicated that the vast majority (>90%) of the subjects reported satisfaction and improvement in a variety of areas after wearing the device long term. The SoundBite system is safe and continues to provide substantial benefit for SSD patients with continual daily use over a 6-month period.

Long-Term Benefit Perception, Complications, and Device Malfunction Rate of Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Implantation for Profound Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss

To longitudinally evaluate short- and long-term subject satisfaction/benefit perception, device usage rates, complication rates, and external device repair rates of bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) implantation on a cohort of adult subjects with profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (PUSHL). Prospective clinical trial. Tertiary referral center. Fifty-six adults with PUSHL, 21 of which underwent BAHA implantation (followed for an average of 3.2 years after implantation; range, 0.8-4.6 yr). Short- and long-term satisfaction/benefit perception outcomes consisting of the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile, Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, and Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire, including a comparison of results between implanted and nonimplanted subjects. Short- and long-term device usage rates, complications, and device failure issues also were carefully documented. There were statistically significant improvements in nearly all measures of benefit perception documented as well as a high rate of long-term device usage (81%). Although satisfaction and benefit perception outcomes generally tended to regress over time when compared with initial short-term outcomes, long-term scores still tended to be significantly improved nevertheless as compared with preoperative levels. Approximately 38% of implants experienced severe local skin reactions (Grade 2 and above) around the implant site at some point throughout the follow-up period, whereas only one (4.8%) required implant removal. 66.7% of subjects required repair of their external sound processor. BAHA implantation seems to provide a high level of short- and long-term perceived benefit and satisfaction in subjects with PUSHL and high rate of long-term device usage. Implant site adverse local skin reactions and repairs of the external sound processor were quite common.

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 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.

Efficacy of the bone‐anchored hearing aid for single‐sided deafness

The aim was to examine short- and long-term efficacy of the bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) on adults with single-sided deafness. Prospective investigation. The outcome measures included the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT), Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), and Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire (SSD). The BAHA group comprised seven adults with single-sided deafness and the control group comprised 20 adults with essentially normal-hearing sensitivity, bilaterally. The outcome measures were administered in the unaided, directional BAHA, and omnidirectional BAHA conditions after 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months of BAHA use. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) model was used to evaluate the data (for the SSD, a nonparametric analog of ANOVA was employed). None of the factors (time, HINT condition, amplification status) or their interactions were significant predictors of change in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) from baseline over time on the HINT. The mean SNR (non-baseline-subtracted) was significantly lower in the directional BAHA versus the unaided status and in the omnidirectional BAHA versus the unaided status, but only under the noise in front, speech lateralized to the bad ear HINT condition. Significant short- and long-term BAHA benefit was observed on the APHAB (all subscales except Aversiveness) and SSD (all questionnaire items). Our results show short- and long-term efficacy for the BAHA in adults with single-sided deafness for recognition of speech in noise (noise in front, speech lateralized to the bad ear) and on subjective measures of benefit.

Longitudinal Benefit From and Satisfaction With the Baha System for Patients With Acquired Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss

To analyze the short-, medium-, and long-term benefits from and satisfaction with the Baha for patients with profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Prospective clinical study. Head and Neck Institute at the Cleveland Clinic. Eight patients with acquired profound unilateral SNHL. Patients underwent unaided baseline testing and aided Baha testing using laboratory and self-report measures at 6 postfitting intervals. Laboratory measures included the revised Speech Perception in Noise test, Hearing in Noise Test, and localization testing. Disease-specific self-report measures included the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults, and Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire. The Medical Outcomes Study SF-36 Health Survey was used to assess health-related quality of life. Based on 95% confidence intervals for unaided testing, significant improvements on aided revised Speech Perception in Noise, Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, and Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults scores were sustained during the 18-month test interval. Variable performance was observed for the Hearing in Noise Test over time and patients. No acclimatization effects were shown for localization testing or the generic health-related quality-of-life measure. Patients reported satisfaction in a variety of situations as quantified by the Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire in the long-term. The Baha is effective in reducing psychosocial consequences of unilateral profound SNHL for the long-term. Improvement in speech understanding occurred when the primary signal was spatially separated from background noise. Localization performance did not improve with Baha use. Overall, patients were satisfied with their Baha and would still elect to have this procedure if given a second chance.