Otolaryngology Division, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Department of Otolaryngology, San Giuseppe Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Aug;276(8):2165-2170. doi: 10.1007/s00405-019-05450-4. Epub 2019 May 3.
We compared our historical medium-term data obtained with an active semi-implanted bone conduction device and the hearing results of a new passive bone conduction hearing device to determine its predictive value for the hearing results with the semi-implanted device.
The study sample was 15 patients with an active bone conduction implant (mean follow-up 26 months). Pure tone audiometry was performed with headphones, sound field speech audiometry was conducted unaided, and free-field speech audiometry was carried out with both the active bone conduction system and the passive device switched off.
As compared with the unaided condition, speech reception was significantly improved with both devices. Comparison of speech reception threshold at 100% of word recognition showed no difference between the active and the passive device. At lower intensity the difference in speech perception was significant in the patients with monaural fitting (group A) and was non-statistically significant in those with binaural fitting (group B); the speech reception threshold at 50% of word recognition was 26.00 dB (± 10.22) with the active implant and 30.50 dB (± 7.98) with the passive device in group A (p = 0.047) and 24.00 dB (± 5.48) and 29.00 dB (± 2.24) in group B (p = 0.052), respectively.
The hearing outcome after active bone conduction implant was comparable to published data. Compared with the unaided condition, speech recognition was significantly improved with the passive device. The device may also provide value to predict the hearing outcome with the implanted device, especially at higher intensities.
IV.
我们将比较我们使用主动半植入式骨导设备获得的历史中期数据和新型无源骨导听力设备的听力结果，以确定其对使用半植入式设备的听力结果的预测价值。
研究样本为 15 名使用主动骨传导植入物的患者（平均随访 26 个月）。使用耳机进行纯音测听，在未佩戴助听设备的情况下进行声场言语测听，并用主动骨传导系统和无源设备关闭时进行自由场言语测听。
与未佩戴助听设备相比，两种设备都显著提高了言语接受度。在 100%单词识别率下比较言语接受阈，主动设备和无源设备之间无差异。在较低强度下，单侧适配患者的言语感知差异显著（A 组），双侧适配患者的差异无统计学意义（B 组）；A 组中，主动植入物的言语识别阈为 50%单词识别率时为 26.00dB（±10.22），无源设备为 30.50dB（±7.98）（p=0.047），B 组分别为 24.00dB（±5.48）和 29.00dB（±2.24）（p=0.052）。
主动骨传导植入后的听力结果与已发表的数据相当。与未佩戴助听设备相比，被动设备显著提高了言语识别能力。该设备可能还可以预测植入设备的听力结果，尤其是在较高强度下。
IV。
