title: Individualised headband simulation test for predicting outcome after percutaneous bone conductive implantation.
abstract: Trans-cutaneous bone conduction (BC) stimulators, when coupled to the HB (BC-HB), are generally used to predict the results that could be achieved after bone conductive implant (BCI) surgery, and their performance is generally considered inferior to that provided by the definitive percutaneous system. The aim of the present study was to compare the performances between BC-HB and BCI of the same typology, when the former's sound processor is fitted in accordance to the individual auditory situation. Twenty-two patients selected for surgical application of a BCI were evaluated and the same audiological protocol was used to select the candidate and assess the final outcome. The BC-HB was properly fitted based on individual hearing loss and personal auditory targets, and tested as primary step of the protocol to obtain the most reliable predictive value. The BAHA Divino and BP100 sound processors were applied in 12 patients with conductive/mixed hearing loss (CMHL) and in 10 subjects with single sided deafness (SSD). Audiometric evaluation included the pure tone average (PTA3) threshold between 250-1000 Hz; the PTA thresholds at 2000 and 4000 Hz; intelligibility scores as percentage of word recognition (WRS) in quiet and in noise; and subjective evaluation of perceived sound quality by a visual analogue scale (VAS). Statistical evaluation with a student's t test was used for assessment of efficacy of BC-HB and BCI compared with the unaided condition. Spearman's Rho coefficient was used to confirm the reliability of the BC-HB simulation test as a predictor of definitive outcome. The results showed that the mean PTA difference between BCI and BC-HB ranged from 2.54 to 8.27 decibels in the CMHL group and from 1.27 to 3.9 decibels in the SSD group. Compared with the BC-HB, BCI showed a better WRS both in CMHL (16% in quiet and 12% in noise) and in SSD (5% in quiet and a 1% in noise) groups. Spearman's Rho coefficient, calculated for PTA, WRS in quiet and in noise and VAS in the two aided conditions, showed a significant correlation between BC-HB and BCI, between PTA and VAS and between WRS in quiet and VAS. It is possible to conclude that the headband test, when the sound processor of the selected bone conductive implant is fitted and personalised for individual hearing loss and auditory targets of the candidate, may provide highly predictive data of the definitive outcome after BCI implant surgery.
authors.affiliation: NESMOS Department, Otolaryngology Clinic, Medicine and Psychology, Sapienza Università di Roma, Italy;
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Monini
authors.affiliation: NESMOS Department, Otolaryngology Clinic, Medicine and Psychology, Sapienza Università di Roma, Italy;
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Filippi
authors.affiliation: NESMOS Department, Otolaryngology Clinic, Medicine and Psychology, Sapienza Università di Roma, Italy;
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Atturo
authors.affiliation: NESMOS Department, Otolaryngology Clinic, Medicine and Psychology, Sapienza Università di Roma, Italy;
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Biagini
authors.affiliation: University College London, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, London, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: A I
authors.initials: AI
authors.lastname: Lazzarino
authors.affiliation: NESMOS Department, Otolaryngology Clinic, Medicine and Psychology, Sapienza Università di Roma, Italy;
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Barbara
mesh_terms: D001309:Auditory Threshold; D001844:Bone Conduction; D006310:Hearing Aids; D006314:Hearing Loss, Conductive / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013067:Speech Perception; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: Bone conductive implant; Headband test; Hearing loss; Pure tone audiometry; Speech audiometry; VAS
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2000 Jan;107(1):422-31
references.pmid: 10641651
references.citation: Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord). 2001;122(5):343-50
references.pmid: 12092506
references.citation: Acta Otolaryngol. 1966;:Suppl 213:1+
references.pmid: 5934763
references.citation: Scand Audiol. 1984;13(1):3-13
references.pmid: 6719012
references.citation: Acta Otolaryngol. 1985 Sep-Oct;100(3-4):229-39
references.pmid: 4061073
references.citation: Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987 May;79(5):721-31
references.pmid: 3575518
references.citation: J Laryngol Otol. 2014 Jan;128(1):35-42
references.pmid: 24330750
references.citation: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 1993 Jan-Feb;13(1):63-77
references.pmid: 8135099
references.citation: Scand Audiol. 1994;23(3):201-3
references.pmid: 7997838
references.citation: Otol Neurotol. 2005 Nov;26(6):1245-61
references.pmid: 16272952
references.citation: Int J Audiol. 2006 May;45(5):301-8
references.pmid: 16717021
references.citation: Otol Neurotol. 2009 Jan;30(1):70-5
references.pmid: 18957902
references.citation: Ear Nose Throat J. 2011 May;90(5):E21-7
references.pmid: 21563076
references.citation: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990 Apr;102(4):339-44
references.pmid: 2113260