title: Long-term benefit perception, complications, and device malfunction rate of bone-anchored hearing aid implantation for profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To longitudinally evaluate short- and long-term subject satisfaction/benefit perception, device usage rates, complication rates, and external device repair rates of bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) implantation on a cohort of adult subjects with profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (PUSHL).
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective clinical trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  Tertiary referral center.
  
  
  METHODS
  Fifty-six adults with PUSHL, 21 of which underwent BAHA implantation (followed for an average of 3.2 years after implantation; range, 0.8-4.6 yr).
  
  
  METHODS
  Short- and long-term satisfaction/benefit perception outcomes consisting of the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile, Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, and Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire, including a comparison of results between implanted and nonimplanted subjects. Short- and long-term device usage rates, complications, and device failure issues also were carefully documented.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were statistically significant improvements in nearly all measures of benefit perception documented as well as a high rate of long-term device usage (81%). Although satisfaction and benefit perception outcomes generally tended to regress over time when compared with initial short-term outcomes, long-term scores still tended to be significantly improved nevertheless as compared with preoperative levels. Approximately 38% of implants experienced severe local skin reactions (Grade 2 and above) around the implant site at some point throughout the follow-up period, whereas only one (4.8%) required implant removal. 66.7% of subjects required repair of their external sound processor.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  BAHA implantation seems to provide a high level of short- and long-term perceived benefit and satisfaction in subjects with PUSHL and high rate of long-term device usage. Implant site adverse local skin reactions and repairs of the external sound processor were quite common.
authors: Ear Sciences Centre, School of Surgery, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. michaelgluth@mac.com
authors: Michael B
authors: MB
authors: Gluth
authors: Katrise M
authors: KM
authors: Eager
authors: Robert H
authors: RH
authors: Eikelboom
authors: Marcus D
authors: MD
authors: Atlas
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001301:Audiometry, Pure-Tone; D015331:Cohort Studies; D004868:Equipment Failure; D005260:Female; D006310:Hearing Aids / Q000009:adverse effects; D006319:Hearing Loss, Sensorineural / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy*; D046088:Hearing Loss, Unilateral / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D016348:Osseointegration; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D018579:Patient Selection; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D053441:Suture Anchors; D016896:Treatment Outcome