Bone conduction implants for amplification: comparison of results.
We compared the results from the North American patient database on the Xomed Audiant Bone Conductor to those reported on the NobleBiocare (previously Noblepharma) HC200 bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) implant, using the literature and specific results provided by one of the authors. It has been proposed that the percutaneous coupling of the NobleBiocare implant transduces energy more powerfully than the Audiant transcutaneous coupling. If true, percutaneous coupling could provide greater amplification, helping patients experiencing both conductive and sensorineural hearing loss. Aided sound-field thresholds corresponding to bone-conduction thresholds were compared retrospectively through the speech frequencies. Both the BAHA and the Audiant devices amplified in the sound field to approximate preoperative bone-conduction thresholds. No statistically significant differences existed between the amplification of warble tones through the speech frequencies for either device. We conclude that amplification with the Audiant device offers as much gain as the HC200 device through the speech frequencies. While both devices can supply effective amplification for select patients suffering from conductive hearing loss, neither provides gain superior to preoperative bone-conduction thresholds to address the needs of select patients with a substantial sensorineural component.[1]References
- Bone conduction implants for amplification: comparison of results. Hough, D.A., Matthews, P., Hough, J.V. Ear, nose, & throat journal. (1997) [Pubmed]
Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenesOpen Access LicencePrivacy PolicyTerms of Useapsburg
