A Comparative Study of Audiologic Outcomes for Two Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Devices.

OBJECTIVE

In 1977, Tjellstrom et al. used the concept of osseointegration and implanted patients with a titanium screw as part of the first bone-anchored hearing solution. Despite good hearing outcomes with the percutaneous device, there has been a drive for the development of transcutaneous bone conduction systems because of soft tissue complications, aesthetics, and loss or failure of the abutment. This study compares audiologic and quality of life questionnaire outcomes (author-designed questionnaire) for two transcutaneous bone conduction implants.

STUDY

DESIGN

Cross-sectional cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospital and national audiology service.

PATIENTS: Twelve patients, 10 children and two adults. Six recipients of each device.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pure-tone audiometry, aided thresholds, speech discrimination scores, and quality of life questionnaire results.

RESULTS

The unaided four-frequency average air conduction for affected ears was 60.8 dB HL for the Attract group and 57.8 dBHL for the Sophono group; these improved to mean aided thresholds of 30.6 dB HL and 29.8 dB HL, respectively. Therewas no statistical difference between the speech discrimination scores for the two devices in quiet at 55 dB SPL (p = 0.33) orin noise (p = 0.87).

CONCLUSION

Both systems provide audiologic benefit compared with the unaided situation. Comparing small numbers of patients, there was no significant difference in aided thresholds or speech discrimination scores between these two transcutaneous bone-anchored implants. All Attract and Sophono users reported improvement in quality of life and would recommend their device to others in a similar situation.