Comparison of Satisfaction Between Patients Using Percutaneous and Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Devices.

BACKGROUND

Bone conduction devices are widely used to treat conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as single-sided deafness (SSD). A transcutaneous system was introduced recently with the clear advantage of fewer local reactions. Our goal was to evaluate and compare the satisfaction of patients with percutaneous and transcutaneous bone conduction devices.

METHODS

We divided a cohort of 72 patients into groups by type of hearing loss and their relation to the use of the percutaneous or transcutaneous system. The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire, adapted for hearing aids, was employed to assess patient satisfaction, along with an additional questionnaire covering the general usefulness of the devices.

RESULTS

Overall median daily wearing time was 12 hours for the percutaneous and seven for the transcutaneous groups (p < 0.001). We found no correlation between the bone conduction level at any frequency and the GBI satisfaction score. The median total GBI score of the entire patient cohort was 30.1; median values for general, social support, and physical health subscales were 0, 37.5, and 16.7, respectively. People suffering from SSD had the lowest satisfaction rates, and these were significantly lower for the patients who used transcutaneous aids than for those with percutaneous devices (p = 0.033). Similarly, the percutaneous system brought more satisfaction to combined hearing loss patients than did the transcutaneous (p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

Both types of bone conduction devices provide a safe and efficient way to improve hearing for candidates within correct indications. Our study revealed that patients wore the transcutaneous device less than they did the percutaneous. Satisfaction was the lowest among SSD patients who used the transcutaneous device; hence it is especially important to carry out preoperative counseling for such patients.