Patient satisfaction after auditory implant surgery: ten-year experience from a single implanting unit center.

CONCLUSIONS

The satisfaction rate of the subjects with an auditory implant appears strictly related to the resulting auditory improvement, and the surgical variables would play a prevailing role in respect to the esthetic factors.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the rate of satisfaction in subjects who underwent the surgical application of an auditory device at a single Implanting Center Unit.

METHOD: A series of validated questionnaires has been administered to subjects who underwent the surgical application of different auditory devices. The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI), the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) have been used to compare the implanted situation with the hearing-aided one; a percutaneous bone conductive implant (pBCI) with an active middle ear implant (AMEI) on the round window in mixed hearing loss; and an invisible, fully-implantable device with a frankly and bulky semi-implantable device.

RESULTS

The mean GBI scores were higher in Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB)® and Bonebridge® subjects, without significant differences among the various devices. The mean VAS score increased for all the devices in comparison with the conventional hearing aid. The mean APHAB score was similarly better in the implanted condition as total and partial scores.