On the evaluation of a superpower sound processor for bone‐anchored hearing
Objectives Performance of a superpower bone‐anchored hearing aid (Baha), the Baha Cordelle from Cochlear Bone‐Anchored Solutions (BCD1), was compared to its successor, the Baha 5 SuperPower (BCD2). Design A comparative study in which each patient served as its own control. Setting Tertiary clinic. P...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical otolaryngology 2018-04, Vol.43 (2), p.450-455 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 455 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 450 |
| container_title | Clinical otolaryngology |
| container_volume | 43 |
| creator | Bosman, A.J. Kruyt, I.J. Mylanus, E.A.M. Hol, M.K.S. Snik, A.F.M. |
| description | Objectives
Performance of a superpower bone‐anchored hearing aid (Baha), the Baha Cordelle from Cochlear Bone‐Anchored Solutions (BCD1), was compared to its successor, the Baha 5 SuperPower (BCD2).
Design
A comparative study in which each patient served as its own control.
Setting
Tertiary clinic.
Participants
Ten experienced BCD1 users with profound mixed hearing loss. For comparison, data from another study with 10 experienced users with a severe mixed hearing loss using a Cochlear Baha 5 power sound processor (BCD‐P) were included.
Main outcome measures
Speech reception thresholds in noise and APHAB and SSQ questionnaires.
Results
Speech reception thresholds for the digits‐in‐noise (DIN) test were significantly lower (P 5%) from the BCD2 values.
With the APHAB questionnaire scores were significantly lower, that is more favourable, for the ease of communication (P 5%).
Conclusions
Data for BCD2 in profound mixed loss are similar to those for BCD‐P and a severe mixed loss. Of 10 patients, 2 expressed a strong preference for BCD2 over BCD1, and 7 patients had a preference for BCD2 over BCD1. One patient preferred BCD1 because of its built‐in telecoil facility. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/coa.12989 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1943646214</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2013294893</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3889-b0f42213187f2981da7d513c287357cea901f0ec2334bbf9e830dee28d15793b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtKAzEUhoMotlYXvoAE3OiibW7TSZaleINKN7oOmcwZO2U6qUnH0p2P4DP6JEandiF44HDO4uPn50PonJIBjTO0zgwoU1IdoC5NheoLIUeH-z-VHXQSwoIQwUlKj1GHSZUQkvAuepzVeD0HDG-masy6dDV2BTY4NCvwK7cBj4Nr6hyvvLMQgvO4iJu5Gj7fP0xt585DjudgfFm_nKKjwlQBzna3h55vb54m9_3p7O5hMp72LZdS9TNSCMYopzItYm2amzRPKLdMpjxJLRhFaEHAMs5FlhUKJCc5AJM5TVLFM95DV21ubPXaQFjrZRksVJWpwTVBUyX4SIwYFRG9_IMuXOPr2E4zQjlTQioeqeuWst6F4KHQK18ujd9qSvS3Yx0d6x_Hkb3YJTbZEvI9-Ss1AsMW2JQVbP9P0pPZuI38AtzAhU8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2013294893</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>On the evaluation of a superpower sound processor for bone‐anchored hearing</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Bosman, A.J. ; Kruyt, I.J. ; Mylanus, E.A.M. ; Hol, M.K.S. ; Snik, A.F.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bosman, A.J. ; Kruyt, I.J. ; Mylanus, E.A.M. ; Hol, M.K.S. ; Snik, A.F.M.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
Performance of a superpower bone‐anchored hearing aid (Baha), the Baha Cordelle from Cochlear Bone‐Anchored Solutions (BCD1), was compared to its successor, the Baha 5 SuperPower (BCD2).
Design
A comparative study in which each patient served as its own control.
Setting
Tertiary clinic.
Participants
Ten experienced BCD1 users with profound mixed hearing loss. For comparison, data from another study with 10 experienced users with a severe mixed hearing loss using a Cochlear Baha 5 power sound processor (BCD‐P) were included.
Main outcome measures
Speech reception thresholds in noise and APHAB and SSQ questionnaires.
Results
Speech reception thresholds for the digits‐in‐noise (DIN) test were significantly lower (P < 5%), that is more favourable, for BCD2 in the speech and noise frontal condition and in the speech frontal and noise contralateral condition than for BCD1. For the group with severe mixed loss fitted with BCD‐P, the SRTs were not significantly different (P > 5%) from the BCD2 values.
With the APHAB questionnaire scores were significantly lower, that is more favourable, for the ease of communication (P < 5%) and the background noise (P < 1%) domains for BCD2 than for BCD1. APHAB scores for the aversiveness of loud sounds domain were not significantly different for both devices (P > 5%). Scores for the speech and quality domains of the SSQ questionnaire were significantly higher, that is more favourable, for BCD2 than for BCD1. APHAB and SSQ scores for BCD‐P were not significantly different from those for BCD2 (P > 5%).
Conclusions
Data for BCD2 in profound mixed loss are similar to those for BCD‐P and a severe mixed loss. Of 10 patients, 2 expressed a strong preference for BCD2 over BCD1, and 7 patients had a preference for BCD2 over BCD1. One patient preferred BCD1 because of its built‐in telecoil facility.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1749-4478</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1749-4486</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/coa.12989</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28950053</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Acoustics ; Background noise ; Baha ; Bone Conduction ; bone‐anchored hearing ; bone‐conduction device ; Case-Control Studies ; Cochlea ; Comparative studies ; Data processing ; Digits ; Hearing Aids ; Hearing loss ; Hearing Loss, Mixed Conductive-Sensorineural - therapy ; Humans ; Microprocessors ; mixed hearing loss ; Noise ; Patients ; Prosthesis Design ; Sound Localization ; Speech ; Speech Perception ; Thresholds</subject><ispartof>Clinical otolaryngology, 2018-04, Vol.43 (2), p.450-455</ispartof><rights>2017 The Authors. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2017 The Authors. Clinical Otolaryngology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3889-b0f42213187f2981da7d513c287357cea901f0ec2334bbf9e830dee28d15793b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3889-b0f42213187f2981da7d513c287357cea901f0ec2334bbf9e830dee28d15793b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5142-2236 ; 0000-0001-5016-989X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fcoa.12989$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcoa.12989$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28950053$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bosman, A.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kruyt, I.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mylanus, E.A.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hol, M.K.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Snik, A.F.M.</creatorcontrib><title>On the evaluation of a superpower sound processor for bone‐anchored hearing</title><title>Clinical otolaryngology</title><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><description>Objectives
Performance of a superpower bone‐anchored hearing aid (Baha), the Baha Cordelle from Cochlear Bone‐Anchored Solutions (BCD1), was compared to its successor, the Baha 5 SuperPower (BCD2).
Design
A comparative study in which each patient served as its own control.
Setting
Tertiary clinic.
Participants
Ten experienced BCD1 users with profound mixed hearing loss. For comparison, data from another study with 10 experienced users with a severe mixed hearing loss using a Cochlear Baha 5 power sound processor (BCD‐P) were included.
Main outcome measures
Speech reception thresholds in noise and APHAB and SSQ questionnaires.
Results
Speech reception thresholds for the digits‐in‐noise (DIN) test were significantly lower (P < 5%), that is more favourable, for BCD2 in the speech and noise frontal condition and in the speech frontal and noise contralateral condition than for BCD1. For the group with severe mixed loss fitted with BCD‐P, the SRTs were not significantly different (P > 5%) from the BCD2 values.
With the APHAB questionnaire scores were significantly lower, that is more favourable, for the ease of communication (P < 5%) and the background noise (P < 1%) domains for BCD2 than for BCD1. APHAB scores for the aversiveness of loud sounds domain were not significantly different for both devices (P > 5%). Scores for the speech and quality domains of the SSQ questionnaire were significantly higher, that is more favourable, for BCD2 than for BCD1. APHAB and SSQ scores for BCD‐P were not significantly different from those for BCD2 (P > 5%).
Conclusions
Data for BCD2 in profound mixed loss are similar to those for BCD‐P and a severe mixed loss. Of 10 patients, 2 expressed a strong preference for BCD2 over BCD1, and 7 patients had a preference for BCD2 over BCD1. One patient preferred BCD1 because of its built‐in telecoil facility.</description><subject>Acoustics</subject><subject>Background noise</subject><subject>Baha</subject><subject>Bone Conduction</subject><subject>bone‐anchored hearing</subject><subject>bone‐conduction device</subject><subject>Case-Control Studies</subject><subject>Cochlea</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>Digits</subject><subject>Hearing Aids</subject><subject>Hearing loss</subject><subject>Hearing Loss, Mixed Conductive-Sensorineural - therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Microprocessors</subject><subject>mixed hearing loss</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Sound Localization</subject><subject>Speech</subject><subject>Speech Perception</subject><subject>Thresholds</subject><issn>1749-4478</issn><issn>1749-4486</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kMtKAzEUhoMotlYXvoAE3OiibW7TSZaleINKN7oOmcwZO2U6qUnH0p2P4DP6JEandiF44HDO4uPn50PonJIBjTO0zgwoU1IdoC5NheoLIUeH-z-VHXQSwoIQwUlKj1GHSZUQkvAuepzVeD0HDG-masy6dDV2BTY4NCvwK7cBj4Nr6hyvvLMQgvO4iJu5Gj7fP0xt585DjudgfFm_nKKjwlQBzna3h55vb54m9_3p7O5hMp72LZdS9TNSCMYopzItYm2amzRPKLdMpjxJLRhFaEHAMs5FlhUKJCc5AJM5TVLFM95DV21ubPXaQFjrZRksVJWpwTVBUyX4SIwYFRG9_IMuXOPr2E4zQjlTQioeqeuWst6F4KHQK18ujd9qSvS3Yx0d6x_Hkb3YJTbZEvI9-Ss1AsMW2JQVbP9P0pPZuI38AtzAhU8</recordid><startdate>201804</startdate><enddate>201804</enddate><creator>Bosman, A.J.</creator><creator>Kruyt, I.J.</creator><creator>Mylanus, E.A.M.</creator><creator>Hol, M.K.S.</creator><creator>Snik, A.F.M.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5142-2236</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5016-989X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201804</creationdate><title>On the evaluation of a superpower sound processor for bone‐anchored hearing</title><author>Bosman, A.J. ; Kruyt, I.J. ; Mylanus, E.A.M. ; Hol, M.K.S. ; Snik, A.F.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3889-b0f42213187f2981da7d513c287357cea901f0ec2334bbf9e830dee28d15793b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Acoustics</topic><topic>Background noise</topic><topic>Baha</topic><topic>Bone Conduction</topic><topic>bone‐anchored hearing</topic><topic>bone‐conduction device</topic><topic>Case-Control Studies</topic><topic>Cochlea</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>Digits</topic><topic>Hearing Aids</topic><topic>Hearing loss</topic><topic>Hearing Loss, Mixed Conductive-Sensorineural - therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Microprocessors</topic><topic>mixed hearing loss</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Sound Localization</topic><topic>Speech</topic><topic>Speech Perception</topic><topic>Thresholds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bosman, A.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kruyt, I.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mylanus, E.A.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hol, M.K.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Snik, A.F.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical otolaryngology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bosman, A.J.</au><au>Kruyt, I.J.</au><au>Mylanus, E.A.M.</au><au>Hol, M.K.S.</au><au>Snik, A.F.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>On the evaluation of a superpower sound processor for bone‐anchored hearing</atitle><jtitle>Clinical otolaryngology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><date>2018-04</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>450</spage><epage>455</epage><pages>450-455</pages><issn>1749-4478</issn><eissn>1749-4486</eissn><abstract>Objectives
Performance of a superpower bone‐anchored hearing aid (Baha), the Baha Cordelle from Cochlear Bone‐Anchored Solutions (BCD1), was compared to its successor, the Baha 5 SuperPower (BCD2).
Design
A comparative study in which each patient served as its own control.
Setting
Tertiary clinic.
Participants
Ten experienced BCD1 users with profound mixed hearing loss. For comparison, data from another study with 10 experienced users with a severe mixed hearing loss using a Cochlear Baha 5 power sound processor (BCD‐P) were included.
Main outcome measures
Speech reception thresholds in noise and APHAB and SSQ questionnaires.
Results
Speech reception thresholds for the digits‐in‐noise (DIN) test were significantly lower (P < 5%), that is more favourable, for BCD2 in the speech and noise frontal condition and in the speech frontal and noise contralateral condition than for BCD1. For the group with severe mixed loss fitted with BCD‐P, the SRTs were not significantly different (P > 5%) from the BCD2 values.
With the APHAB questionnaire scores were significantly lower, that is more favourable, for the ease of communication (P < 5%) and the background noise (P < 1%) domains for BCD2 than for BCD1. APHAB scores for the aversiveness of loud sounds domain were not significantly different for both devices (P > 5%). Scores for the speech and quality domains of the SSQ questionnaire were significantly higher, that is more favourable, for BCD2 than for BCD1. APHAB and SSQ scores for BCD‐P were not significantly different from those for BCD2 (P > 5%).
Conclusions
Data for BCD2 in profound mixed loss are similar to those for BCD‐P and a severe mixed loss. Of 10 patients, 2 expressed a strong preference for BCD2 over BCD1, and 7 patients had a preference for BCD2 over BCD1. One patient preferred BCD1 because of its built‐in telecoil facility.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>28950053</pmid><doi>10.1111/coa.12989</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5142-2236</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5016-989X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1749-4478 |
| ispartof | Clinical otolaryngology, 2018-04, Vol.43 (2), p.450-455 |
| issn | 1749-4478 1749-4486 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1943646214 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library All Journals |
| subjects | Acoustics Background noise Baha Bone Conduction bone‐anchored hearing bone‐conduction device Case-Control Studies Cochlea Comparative studies Data processing Digits Hearing Aids Hearing loss Hearing Loss, Mixed Conductive-Sensorineural - therapy Humans Microprocessors mixed hearing loss Noise Patients Prosthesis Design Sound Localization Speech Speech Perception Thresholds |
| title | On the evaluation of a superpower sound processor for bone‐anchored hearing |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T18%3A51%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=On%20the%20evaluation%20of%20a%20superpower%20sound%20processor%20for%20bone%E2%80%90anchored%20hearing&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20otolaryngology&rft.au=Bosman,%20A.J.&rft.date=2018-04&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=450&rft.epage=455&rft.pages=450-455&rft.issn=1749-4478&rft.eissn=1749-4486&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/coa.12989&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2013294893%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2013294893&rft_id=info:pmid/28950053&rfr_iscdi=true |