Finbow Jennifer, Bance Manohar, Aiken Steve, Gulliver Mark, Verge Janine, Caissie Rachel
*Dalhousie University, Halifax; †QEII Health Sciences Center, Halifax; and ‡Nova Scotia Hearing and Speech Centres, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Otol Neurotol. 2015 Jun;36(5):819-25. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000762.
This study compared wireless Contralateral Routing of Signals (CROS) hearing aid and bone-anchored hearing device (BAHD) in patients with single-sided deafness.
Eight adults with single-sided deafness previously implanted with a BAHD were given a 2-week trial with a CROS hearing aid and tested in unaided and aided conditions. Both devices were compared on head shadow effect reduction, speech perception measures in quiet and in noise, self-assessment questionnaires, and daily diaries.
Both the CROS and BAHD significantly reduced the head shadow effect. QuickSIN scores were significantly better with noise presented to the poorer ear, as compared to the better ear, for the unaided condition, the BAHD, and the CROS. Scores showed no significant differences between the CROS and BAHD with noise presented to the better ear, but scores with the CROS were significantly poorer than in the unaided condition with noise presented to the poorer ear. There were no significant differences between BAHD and CROS for the ratings on the Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness and Speech Spatial Qualities questionnaires. Both devices were worn an average of 10 hours per day. Four participants preferred the CROS for sound quality; three preferred the BAHD for comfort.
Comparisons of CROS and BAHD need to be re-evaluated as both technologies have evolved. In our pilot study, both devices seem comparable, with the CROS avoiding the risks of surgery, and we recommend a trial of CROS in our center for first line treatment of single-sided deafness.
本研究比较了无线对侧信号路由(CROS)助听器和骨锚式听力装置(BAHD)在单侧耳聋患者中的应用。
8名先前已植入BAHD的成年单侧耳聋患者试用了CROS助听器两周,并在未使用辅助设备和使用辅助设备的条件下进行测试。对两种设备在减少头影效应、安静和嘈杂环境下的言语感知测量、自我评估问卷以及日常日记方面进行了比较。
CROS和BAHD均显著降低了头影效应。在未使用辅助设备、使用BAHD和使用CROS的情况下,当噪声施加于听力较差的耳朵时,QuickSIN评分显著优于噪声施加于听力较好的耳朵时。当噪声施加于听力较好的耳朵时,CROS和BAHD的评分无显著差异,但当噪声施加于听力较差的耳朵时,CROS的评分显著低于未使用辅助设备时。在单侧耳聋的伯尔尼益处和言语空间质量问卷的评分方面,BAHD和CROS之间无显著差异。两种设备平均每天佩戴10小时。4名参与者因音质更喜欢CROS;3名参与者因舒适度更喜欢BAHD。
由于两种技术都在不断发展,需要重新评估CROS和BAHD的比较情况。在我们的初步研究中,两种设备似乎相当,CROS避免了手术风险,我们建议在我们中心对CROS进行试验,作为单侧耳聋的一线治疗方法。