International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology · 2017
The role of bone conduction hearing aids in congenital unilateral hearing loss: A systematic review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Liu C Carrie, Livingstone Devon, Yunker Warren K
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature on the audiological and/or quality of life benefits of a bone conduction hearing aid (BCHA) in children with congenital unilateral conductive or sensorineural deafness.
METHODS: A systematic search was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines using the PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases. Data were collected on the following outcomes of interest: speech reception threshold, speech discrimination, sound localization, and quality of life measures. Given the heterogeneity of the data for quantitative analysis, the results are qualitatively summarized.
RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the review. Four studies examined the audiological outcomes associated with bone conduction hearing aid implantation. There was a consistent gain in speech reception thresholds and speech discrimination, especially in noisy environments. Results pertaining to sound localization was inconsistent. The studies that examined quality of life measures reported a high usage rate of BCHAs among children. Quality of life improvements are reported with suggested benefit in the subdomain of learning.
CONCLUSION: Given the potential benefits of a BCHA, along with the fact that it can be safely trialed using a headband, it is reasonable to trial a BCHA in children with congenital unilateral deafness. Should the trial offer audiological and/or quality of life benefits for the individual child, then BCHA implantation can be considered.
METHODS: A systematic search was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines using the PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases. Data were collected on the following outcomes of interest: speech reception threshold, speech discrimination, sound localization, and quality of life measures. Given the heterogeneity of the data for quantitative analysis, the results are qualitatively summarized.
RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the review. Four studies examined the audiological outcomes associated with bone conduction hearing aid implantation. There was a consistent gain in speech reception thresholds and speech discrimination, especially in noisy environments. Results pertaining to sound localization was inconsistent. The studies that examined quality of life measures reported a high usage rate of BCHAs among children. Quality of life improvements are reported with suggested benefit in the subdomain of learning.
CONCLUSION: Given the potential benefits of a BCHA, along with the fact that it can be safely trialed using a headband, it is reasonable to trial a BCHA in children with congenital unilateral deafness. Should the trial offer audiological and/or quality of life benefits for the individual child, then BCHA implantation can be considered.