Vibrant sound bridge application to middle ear windows versus conventional hearing aids: a comparative study based on international outcome inventory for hearing aids
- 554 Downloads
In this study, we aimed to compare the outcomes of satisfaction of the patients who used hearing aids preceding the vibrant sound bridge (VSB) application on middle ear windows (14 oval window and 5 round window). Nineteen adult patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss were included in the study. All patients used behind the ear hearing aids on the site which was selected for VSB application. The patients used hearing aids for at least 3 months before the VSB operation. The floating mass transducer (FMT) was placed on one of the middle ear windows (oval or round) in VSB operation. The patients were evaluated with International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) preoperatively after at least 3 months trial of conventional hearing aid and postoperatively after 3 months use of VSB. No perioperative problem was encountered. The total score of IOI-HA was significantly higher with VSB compared with conventional hearing aids (p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the daily use, residual activity limitations, satisfaction, impact on others, quality of life between middle ear implant and hearing aid (p > 0.05). The IOI-HA scores were significantly higher with the middle ear implant than the conventional hearing aid regarding benefit and residual participation restrictions (p < 0.05). Although the scores for quality of life assessment was similar between VSB and hearing aid use, there was a superiority of VSB in terms of benefit and residual participation restrictions as well as overall IOI-HA scores as the FMT was placed on one of the middle ear windows.
KeywordsVibrant sound bridge Hearing aid International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids
- 1.Kochkin S, MarkeTrack III (1992) Higher hearing aid sales don’t signal better market penetration. Hear Journal 45:47–54Google Scholar
- 7.Geoffrey RB (2010) The vibrant soundbridge: design and development. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 69:1–13Google Scholar