International journal of audiology · 2016
Amplification of transcutaneous and percutaneous bone-conduction devices with a test-band in an induced model of conductive hearing loss.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Park Marn Joon, Lee Jae Ryung, Yang Chan Joo, Yoo Myung Hoon, Jin In Suk, Choi Chi Ho, Park Hong Ju
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Transcutaneous devices have a disadvantage, the dampening effect by soft tissue between the bone and devices. We investigated hearing outcomes with percutaneous and transcutaneous devices using test-bands in an induced unilateral conductive hearing loss.
DESIGN: Comparison of hearing outcomes of two devices in the same individuals.
STUDY SAMPLE: The right ear was plugged in 30 subjects and a test-band with devices (Cochlear™ Baha® BP110 Power and Sophono® Alpha-2 MPO™) was applied on the right mastoid tip with the left ear masked. Sound-field thresholds, speech recognition thresholds (SRTs), and word recognition scores (WRSs) were compared.
RESULTS: Aided thresholds of Sophono were significantly better than those of Baha at most frequencies. Sophono WRSs (86 ± 12%) at 40 dB SPL and SRTs (14 ± 5 dB HL) were significantly better than those (73 ± 24% and 23 ± 8 dB HL) of Baha. However, Sophono WRSs (98 ± 3%) at 60 dB SPL did not differ from Baha WRSs (95 ± 12%).
CONCLUSION: Amplifications of the current transcutaneous device were not inferior to those of percutaneous devices with a test-band in subjects with normal bone-conduction thresholds. Since the percutaneous devices can increase the gain when fixed to the skull by eliminating the dampening effect, both devices are expected to provide sufficient hearing amplification.
DESIGN: Comparison of hearing outcomes of two devices in the same individuals.
STUDY SAMPLE: The right ear was plugged in 30 subjects and a test-band with devices (Cochlear™ Baha® BP110 Power and Sophono® Alpha-2 MPO™) was applied on the right mastoid tip with the left ear masked. Sound-field thresholds, speech recognition thresholds (SRTs), and word recognition scores (WRSs) were compared.
RESULTS: Aided thresholds of Sophono were significantly better than those of Baha at most frequencies. Sophono WRSs (86 ± 12%) at 40 dB SPL and SRTs (14 ± 5 dB HL) were significantly better than those (73 ± 24% and 23 ± 8 dB HL) of Baha. However, Sophono WRSs (98 ± 3%) at 60 dB SPL did not differ from Baha WRSs (95 ± 12%).
CONCLUSION: Amplifications of the current transcutaneous device were not inferior to those of percutaneous devices with a test-band in subjects with normal bone-conduction thresholds. Since the percutaneous devices can increase the gain when fixed to the skull by eliminating the dampening effect, both devices are expected to provide sufficient hearing amplification.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Acoustic StimulationAdultAudiometry, Pure-ToneAuditory ThresholdBone ConductionComprehensionCorrection of Hearing ImpairmentEquipment DesignFemaleHearing AidsHearing Loss, ConductiveHumansMalePersons with Hearing DisabilitiesSpeech IntelligibilitySpeech PerceptionSpeech Reception Threshold TestYoung Adult