Suppr超能文献

一种新型软骨传导装置与骨传导装置的听力结果

Hearing Outcomes of a New Cartilage Conduction Device vs Bone Conduction Devices.

作者信息

Nairn Emily M, Chen Alyssa S, Nishimura Tadashi, Berezovsky Anna, Stucken Emily Z

机构信息

Division of Audiology, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

出版信息

Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2023 Apr;168(4):821-828. doi: 10.1177/01945998221123057. Epub 2023 Jan 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare audiometric outcomes of a new cartilage conduction hearing device (CCD) with traditional bone conduction hearing devices (BCDs).

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical trial and crossover study design.

SETTING

Tertiary academic center.

METHODS

Sixteen adults (19 ears) with congenital aural atresia or overclosed ear canals who previously underwent BCD implantation were fitted with a CCD. Audiometric data were collected with use of the BCD and the CCD.

RESULTS

The mean pretreatment 4-frequency pure tone average was 81 dB. The mean aided pure tone averages with the BCD and CCD were 27 and 32 dB (P = .002), and the mean functional gains were 54 and 49 dB (P = .002), respectively. The mean consonant-nucleus-consonant scores with the BCD were 90% (best aided) and 80% (aided ear isolated), and those with the CCD were 86% and 76%. Mean AzBio scores were 90% (quiet), 77% (+10 dB SNR [signal to noise ratio]), and 52% (+5 dB SNR) when isolating the BCD ear and 90%, 73%, and 41% when isolating the CCD ear. No difference in speech scores achieved statistical significance except the AzBio isolated to the aided ear in the +5-dB SNR condition, which favored the BCD (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Pure tone audiometric outcomes with the BCD show a small advantage over the CCD, with the difference driven mainly by high-frequency responses. Speech outcomes were equivalent apart from the +5-db SNR condition, which favored the BCD.

摘要

目的

比较一种新型软骨传导听力装置(CCD)与传统骨传导听力装置(BCD)的听力测试结果。

研究设计

临床试验和交叉研究设计。

研究地点

三级学术中心。

方法

16名患有先天性耳道闭锁或耳道过度闭合且此前已植入BCD的成年人(19只耳朵)佩戴了CCD。使用BCD和CCD收集听力测试数据。

结果

预处理前4频率纯音平均听阈为81分贝。使用BCD和CCD时的平均助听听阈分别为27分贝和32分贝(P = 0.002),平均功能增益分别为54分贝和49分贝(P = 0.002)。使用BCD时的平均辅音-元音-辅音得分在最佳助听时为90%,在患耳单独助听时为80%;使用CCD时分别为86%和76%。在隔离BCD患耳时,平均AzBio得分在安静环境下为90%,在信噪比增加10分贝时为77%,在信噪比增加5分贝时为52%;在隔离CCD患耳时,平均AzBio得分分别为90%、73%和41%。除了在信噪比增加5分贝的情况下患耳单独助听时AzBio得分有统计学差异(BCD更优,P = 0.01)外,言语得分的差异均无统计学意义。

结论

BCD的纯音听力测试结果比CCD略有优势,差异主要由高频反应驱动。除了在信噪比增加5分贝的情况下BCD更优外,言语测试结果相当。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验