Treatment choice in single‐sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. A prospective, multicentre cohort study on 155 patients
Objectives To describe the treatment choice in a cohort of subjects with single‐sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). To assess the reliability of the treatment trials. Design In this national, multicentre, prospective study, the choice of subjects was made after two consecutive tr...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical otolaryngology 2021-07, Vol.46 (4), p.736-743 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 743 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 736 |
| container_title | Clinical otolaryngology |
| container_volume | 46 |
| creator | Marx, Mathieu Mosnier, Isabelle Vincent, Christophe Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier Bakhos, David Lescanne, Emmanuel Flament, Jonathan Bernardeschi, Daniele Sterkers, Olivier Fraysse, Bernard Lepage, Benoit Godey, Benoit Schmerber, Sébastien Uziel, Alain Mondain, Michel Venail, Frédéric Deguine, Olivier |
| description | Objectives
To describe the treatment choice in a cohort of subjects with single‐sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). To assess the reliability of the treatment trials.
Design
In this national, multicentre, prospective study, the choice of subjects was made after two consecutive trials of Contralateral Routing Of the Signal (CROS) hearing aids and a Bone Conduction Device (BCD) on a headband. Subjects could proceed with one of these two options, opt for cochlear implantation or decline all treatments.
Setting
Seven tertiary university hospitals.
Participants
One hundred fifty‐five subjects with SSD or AHL fulfilling the candidacy criteria for cochlear implantation, with or without associated tinnitus.
Main outcome measures
After the two trials, the number of subjects choosing each option was described. Repeated assessments of both generic and auditory‐specific quality of life were conducted, as well as hearing assessments (speech recognition in noise and horizontal localization).
Results
CROS was chosen by 75 subjects, followed by cochlear implantation (n = 51), BCD (n = 18) and abstention (n = 11). Patients who opted for cochlear implantation had a poorer quality of life (P = .03). The improvement of quality of life indices after each trial was significantly associated with the final treatment choice (P = .008 for generic indices, P = .002 for auditory‐specific indices). The follow‐up showed that this improvement had been overestimated in the CROS group, with a long‐term retention rate of 52.5%.
Conclusions
More than one third of SSD/AHL subjects are unsatisfied after CROS and BCD trials. Repeated quality of life assessments help counselling the patient for his/her treatment choice. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/coa.13672 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2464187751</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2464187751</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-e242d5fa1701a7f5b993675b29baba6d95f723d7351de24e3c1497bbb104df1f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc9uEzEQhy1ERUvhwAsgS1yoRNL1v3j3GEUUkCr1Us6W154lrnbt4PEW5dZH4Bl5Etym9IBUX8bSfPo0Mz9C3rFmyeo7d8kumVhp_oKcMC27hZTt6uXTX7fH5DXiTdNI0Wj2ihwLwcVKMnFC7q4z2DJBLNRtU3BAQ6QY4o8R_tz9xuDBUw92iIBIbfTU4n6aoOTg6BZsriQdE-KSrukuJ9yBK-EWPtFpHkvVxZKBurRNuVAss9_TFClTiu5sCbWLb8jRYEeEt4_1lHy_-Hy9-bq4vPrybbO-XDjRtnwBXHKvBst0w6weVN91dWHV8663vV35Tg2aC6-FYr6yIByTne77njXSD2wQp-TjwVun_DkDFjMFdDCONkKa0XBZD9JqrVhFP_yH3qQ5xzqd4Upy1SmpVKXODpSra2OGwexymGzeG9aY-1hMjcU8xFLZ94_GuZ_AP5H_cqjA-QH4FUbYP28ym6v1QfkXeTGYOw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2542595455</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Treatment choice in single‐sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. A prospective, multicentre cohort study on 155 patients</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Marx, Mathieu ; Mosnier, Isabelle ; Vincent, Christophe ; Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier ; Bakhos, David ; Lescanne, Emmanuel ; Flament, Jonathan ; Bernardeschi, Daniele ; Sterkers, Olivier ; Fraysse, Bernard ; Lepage, Benoit ; Godey, Benoit ; Schmerber, Sébastien ; Uziel, Alain ; Mondain, Michel ; Venail, Frédéric ; Deguine, Olivier</creator><creatorcontrib>Marx, Mathieu ; Mosnier, Isabelle ; Vincent, Christophe ; Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier ; Bakhos, David ; Lescanne, Emmanuel ; Flament, Jonathan ; Bernardeschi, Daniele ; Sterkers, Olivier ; Fraysse, Bernard ; Lepage, Benoit ; Godey, Benoit ; Schmerber, Sébastien ; Uziel, Alain ; Mondain, Michel ; Venail, Frédéric ; Deguine, Olivier</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
To describe the treatment choice in a cohort of subjects with single‐sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). To assess the reliability of the treatment trials.
Design
In this national, multicentre, prospective study, the choice of subjects was made after two consecutive trials of Contralateral Routing Of the Signal (CROS) hearing aids and a Bone Conduction Device (BCD) on a headband. Subjects could proceed with one of these two options, opt for cochlear implantation or decline all treatments.
Setting
Seven tertiary university hospitals.
Participants
One hundred fifty‐five subjects with SSD or AHL fulfilling the candidacy criteria for cochlear implantation, with or without associated tinnitus.
Main outcome measures
After the two trials, the number of subjects choosing each option was described. Repeated assessments of both generic and auditory‐specific quality of life were conducted, as well as hearing assessments (speech recognition in noise and horizontal localization).
Results
CROS was chosen by 75 subjects, followed by cochlear implantation (n = 51), BCD (n = 18) and abstention (n = 11). Patients who opted for cochlear implantation had a poorer quality of life (P = .03). The improvement of quality of life indices after each trial was significantly associated with the final treatment choice (P = .008 for generic indices, P = .002 for auditory‐specific indices). The follow‐up showed that this improvement had been overestimated in the CROS group, with a long‐term retention rate of 52.5%.
Conclusions
More than one third of SSD/AHL subjects are unsatisfied after CROS and BCD trials. Repeated quality of life assessments help counselling the patient for his/her treatment choice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1749-4478</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1749-4486</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/coa.13672</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33236413</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>asymmetric hearing loss ; Asymmetry ; BAHA ; binaural hearing ; Bone Conduction ; Choice Behavior ; Clinical trials ; Cochlea ; cochlear implant ; Cochlear Implants ; Cohort analysis ; CROS hearing aids ; Deafness ; Female ; France ; Hearing Aids ; Hearing loss ; Hearing Loss, Unilateral - rehabilitation ; Humans ; Implantation ; Localization ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patients ; Prospective Studies ; Quality assessment ; Quality of Life ; Reliability analysis ; single‐sided deafness ; Speech Reception Threshold Test ; Speech recognition ; Tinnitus</subject><ispartof>Clinical otolaryngology, 2021-07, Vol.46 (4), p.736-743</ispartof><rights>2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-e242d5fa1701a7f5b993675b29baba6d95f723d7351de24e3c1497bbb104df1f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-e242d5fa1701a7f5b993675b29baba6d95f723d7351de24e3c1497bbb104df1f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8295-8885 ; 0000-0003-0458-4827 ; 0000-0003-1417-5082</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.13672$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcoa.13672$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33236413$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Marx, Mathieu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mosnier, Isabelle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vincent, Christophe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bakhos, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lescanne, Emmanuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flament, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernardeschi, Daniele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sterkers, Olivier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fraysse, Bernard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lepage, Benoit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Godey, Benoit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmerber, Sébastien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uziel, Alain</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mondain, Michel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venail, Frédéric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deguine, Olivier</creatorcontrib><title>Treatment choice in single‐sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. A prospective, multicentre cohort study on 155 patients</title><title>Clinical otolaryngology</title><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><description>Objectives
To describe the treatment choice in a cohort of subjects with single‐sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). To assess the reliability of the treatment trials.
Design
In this national, multicentre, prospective study, the choice of subjects was made after two consecutive trials of Contralateral Routing Of the Signal (CROS) hearing aids and a Bone Conduction Device (BCD) on a headband. Subjects could proceed with one of these two options, opt for cochlear implantation or decline all treatments.
Setting
Seven tertiary university hospitals.
Participants
One hundred fifty‐five subjects with SSD or AHL fulfilling the candidacy criteria for cochlear implantation, with or without associated tinnitus.
Main outcome measures
After the two trials, the number of subjects choosing each option was described. Repeated assessments of both generic and auditory‐specific quality of life were conducted, as well as hearing assessments (speech recognition in noise and horizontal localization).
Results
CROS was chosen by 75 subjects, followed by cochlear implantation (n = 51), BCD (n = 18) and abstention (n = 11). Patients who opted for cochlear implantation had a poorer quality of life (P = .03). The improvement of quality of life indices after each trial was significantly associated with the final treatment choice (P = .008 for generic indices, P = .002 for auditory‐specific indices). The follow‐up showed that this improvement had been overestimated in the CROS group, with a long‐term retention rate of 52.5%.
Conclusions
More than one third of SSD/AHL subjects are unsatisfied after CROS and BCD trials. Repeated quality of life assessments help counselling the patient for his/her treatment choice.</description><subject>asymmetric hearing loss</subject><subject>Asymmetry</subject><subject>BAHA</subject><subject>binaural hearing</subject><subject>Bone Conduction</subject><subject>Choice Behavior</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Cochlea</subject><subject>cochlear implant</subject><subject>Cochlear Implants</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>CROS hearing aids</subject><subject>Deafness</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>France</subject><subject>Hearing Aids</subject><subject>Hearing loss</subject><subject>Hearing Loss, Unilateral - rehabilitation</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implantation</subject><subject>Localization</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Reliability analysis</subject><subject>single‐sided deafness</subject><subject>Speech Reception Threshold Test</subject><subject>Speech recognition</subject><subject>Tinnitus</subject><issn>1749-4478</issn><issn>1749-4486</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc9uEzEQhy1ERUvhwAsgS1yoRNL1v3j3GEUUkCr1Us6W154lrnbt4PEW5dZH4Bl5Etym9IBUX8bSfPo0Mz9C3rFmyeo7d8kumVhp_oKcMC27hZTt6uXTX7fH5DXiTdNI0Wj2ihwLwcVKMnFC7q4z2DJBLNRtU3BAQ6QY4o8R_tz9xuDBUw92iIBIbfTU4n6aoOTg6BZsriQdE-KSrukuJ9yBK-EWPtFpHkvVxZKBurRNuVAss9_TFClTiu5sCbWLb8jRYEeEt4_1lHy_-Hy9-bq4vPrybbO-XDjRtnwBXHKvBst0w6weVN91dWHV8663vV35Tg2aC6-FYr6yIByTne77njXSD2wQp-TjwVun_DkDFjMFdDCONkKa0XBZD9JqrVhFP_yH3qQ5xzqd4Upy1SmpVKXODpSra2OGwexymGzeG9aY-1hMjcU8xFLZ94_GuZ_AP5H_cqjA-QH4FUbYP28ym6v1QfkXeTGYOw</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Marx, Mathieu</creator><creator>Mosnier, Isabelle</creator><creator>Vincent, Christophe</creator><creator>Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier</creator><creator>Bakhos, David</creator><creator>Lescanne, Emmanuel</creator><creator>Flament, Jonathan</creator><creator>Bernardeschi, Daniele</creator><creator>Sterkers, Olivier</creator><creator>Fraysse, Bernard</creator><creator>Lepage, Benoit</creator><creator>Godey, Benoit</creator><creator>Schmerber, Sébastien</creator><creator>Uziel, Alain</creator><creator>Mondain, Michel</creator><creator>Venail, Frédéric</creator><creator>Deguine, Olivier</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><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/0000-0001-8295-8885</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0458-4827</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1417-5082</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Treatment choice in single‐sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. A prospective, multicentre cohort study on 155 patients</title><author>Marx, Mathieu ; Mosnier, Isabelle ; Vincent, Christophe ; Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier ; Bakhos, David ; Lescanne, Emmanuel ; Flament, Jonathan ; Bernardeschi, Daniele ; Sterkers, Olivier ; Fraysse, Bernard ; Lepage, Benoit ; Godey, Benoit ; Schmerber, Sébastien ; Uziel, Alain ; Mondain, Michel ; Venail, Frédéric ; Deguine, Olivier</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-e242d5fa1701a7f5b993675b29baba6d95f723d7351de24e3c1497bbb104df1f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>asymmetric hearing loss</topic><topic>Asymmetry</topic><topic>BAHA</topic><topic>binaural hearing</topic><topic>Bone Conduction</topic><topic>Choice Behavior</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Cochlea</topic><topic>cochlear implant</topic><topic>Cochlear Implants</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>CROS hearing aids</topic><topic>Deafness</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>France</topic><topic>Hearing Aids</topic><topic>Hearing loss</topic><topic>Hearing Loss, Unilateral - rehabilitation</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implantation</topic><topic>Localization</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Reliability analysis</topic><topic>single‐sided deafness</topic><topic>Speech Reception Threshold Test</topic><topic>Speech recognition</topic><topic>Tinnitus</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Marx, Mathieu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mosnier, Isabelle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vincent, Christophe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bakhos, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lescanne, Emmanuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flament, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernardeschi, Daniele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sterkers, Olivier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fraysse, Bernard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lepage, Benoit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Godey, Benoit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmerber, Sébastien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uziel, Alain</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mondain, Michel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venail, Frédéric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deguine, Olivier</creatorcontrib><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>Marx, Mathieu</au><au>Mosnier, Isabelle</au><au>Vincent, Christophe</au><au>Bonne, Nicolas‐Xavier</au><au>Bakhos, David</au><au>Lescanne, Emmanuel</au><au>Flament, Jonathan</au><au>Bernardeschi, Daniele</au><au>Sterkers, Olivier</au><au>Fraysse, Bernard</au><au>Lepage, Benoit</au><au>Godey, Benoit</au><au>Schmerber, Sébastien</au><au>Uziel, Alain</au><au>Mondain, Michel</au><au>Venail, Frédéric</au><au>Deguine, Olivier</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Treatment choice in single‐sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. A prospective, multicentre cohort study on 155 patients</atitle><jtitle>Clinical otolaryngology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>736</spage><epage>743</epage><pages>736-743</pages><issn>1749-4478</issn><eissn>1749-4486</eissn><abstract>Objectives
To describe the treatment choice in a cohort of subjects with single‐sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). To assess the reliability of the treatment trials.
Design
In this national, multicentre, prospective study, the choice of subjects was made after two consecutive trials of Contralateral Routing Of the Signal (CROS) hearing aids and a Bone Conduction Device (BCD) on a headband. Subjects could proceed with one of these two options, opt for cochlear implantation or decline all treatments.
Setting
Seven tertiary university hospitals.
Participants
One hundred fifty‐five subjects with SSD or AHL fulfilling the candidacy criteria for cochlear implantation, with or without associated tinnitus.
Main outcome measures
After the two trials, the number of subjects choosing each option was described. Repeated assessments of both generic and auditory‐specific quality of life were conducted, as well as hearing assessments (speech recognition in noise and horizontal localization).
Results
CROS was chosen by 75 subjects, followed by cochlear implantation (n = 51), BCD (n = 18) and abstention (n = 11). Patients who opted for cochlear implantation had a poorer quality of life (P = .03). The improvement of quality of life indices after each trial was significantly associated with the final treatment choice (P = .008 for generic indices, P = .002 for auditory‐specific indices). The follow‐up showed that this improvement had been overestimated in the CROS group, with a long‐term retention rate of 52.5%.
Conclusions
More than one third of SSD/AHL subjects are unsatisfied after CROS and BCD trials. Repeated quality of life assessments help counselling the patient for his/her treatment choice.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>33236413</pmid><doi>10.1111/coa.13672</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8295-8885</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0458-4827</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1417-5082</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1749-4478 |
| ispartof | Clinical otolaryngology, 2021-07, Vol.46 (4), p.736-743 |
| issn | 1749-4478 1749-4486 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2464187751 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library All Journals |
| subjects | asymmetric hearing loss Asymmetry BAHA binaural hearing Bone Conduction Choice Behavior Clinical trials Cochlea cochlear implant Cochlear Implants Cohort analysis CROS hearing aids Deafness Female France Hearing Aids Hearing loss Hearing Loss, Unilateral - rehabilitation Humans Implantation Localization Male Middle Aged Patients Prospective Studies Quality assessment Quality of Life Reliability analysis single‐sided deafness Speech Reception Threshold Test Speech recognition Tinnitus |
| title | Treatment choice in single‐sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. A prospective, multicentre cohort study on 155 patients |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T03%3A57%3A43IST&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=Treatment%20choice%20in%20single%E2%80%90sided%20deafness%20and%20asymmetric%20hearing%20loss.%20A%20prospective,%20multicentre%20cohort%20study%20on%20155%20patients&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20otolaryngology&rft.au=Marx,%20Mathieu&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=736&rft.epage=743&rft.pages=736-743&rft.issn=1749-4478&rft.eissn=1749-4486&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/coa.13672&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2464187751%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=2542595455&rft_id=info:pmid/33236413&rfr_iscdi=true |