Scholarlink

Purpose <p>This study investigates the audiological performance and user satisfaction of bone-anchored hearing aids (BAHA). It addresses four key aspects: comparison with conventional hearing aids, differences between percutaneous and transcutaneous devices, benefits in unilateral hearing loss, and the patient adaptation process.</p> Methods <p>Between January 2023 and June 2024, 40 patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss received BAHA implants. Audiological evaluations included pure-tone and free-field audiometry, the Italian Matrix Sentence Test, and satisfaction questionnaires.</p> Results <p>BAHA significantly improved hearing thresholds, speech recognition, and signal-to-noise ratios compared to the unaided situation and to the conventional hearing aid use, with sustained benefits over 3 months. Questionnaire scores confirmed enhanced patient-reported outcomes.</p> Conclusion <p>Significant improvements were noted in audiometric and subjective outcomes, with BAHA outperforming conventional hearing aids in noise. Percutaneous devices showed better high-frequency performance, but both systems provided similar speech-in-noise benefits. BAHA also enhanced binaural hearing in unilateral loss. Audiologic results at 3 and 6 months are similar: after 3 months BAHA use, adaptation is complete.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Critical issues in bone anchored hearing aids

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月24日

查看全文
  • Michael Dalè,
  • Francesco Buono,
  • Federica Simoni,
  • Alessia Pennacchi,
  • Elena Ferrari,
  • Daniele Corbo,
  • Santomauro Valentina,
  • Eolo Mario Castello

摘要

Purpose

This study investigates the audiological performance and user satisfaction of bone-anchored hearing aids (BAHA). It addresses four key aspects: comparison with conventional hearing aids, differences between percutaneous and transcutaneous devices, benefits in unilateral hearing loss, and the patient adaptation process.

Methods

Between January 2023 and June 2024, 40 patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss received BAHA implants. Audiological evaluations included pure-tone and free-field audiometry, the Italian Matrix Sentence Test, and satisfaction questionnaires.

Results

BAHA significantly improved hearing thresholds, speech recognition, and signal-to-noise ratios compared to the unaided situation and to the conventional hearing aid use, with sustained benefits over 3 months. Questionnaire scores confirmed enhanced patient-reported outcomes.

Conclusion

Significant improvements were noted in audiometric and subjective outcomes, with BAHA outperforming conventional hearing aids in noise. Percutaneous devices showed better high-frequency performance, but both systems provided similar speech-in-noise benefits. BAHA also enhanced binaural hearing in unilateral loss. Audiologic results at 3 and 6 months are similar: after 3 months BAHA use, adaptation is complete.