일측성 전농 환자에서의 청력 재활: 바하와 크로스 보청기의 이득과 선택 기준
Hearing Rehabilitation of Single-Sided Deafness: Benefit and Selection Criteria of Bone Anchored Hearing Aid and Contralateral Routing of Signal Hearing Aid
2
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background and Objectives There are two ways to route sound from a deaf hemifield to a functional ear: the bone anchored hearing aid (BAHA) and the contralateral routing of signal hearing aid (CROS HA). BAHA uses transcranial bone conduction; on the other hand, CROS HA uses air conduction. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the benefit of these auditory rehabilitation devices objectively and subjectively, and to analyze factors that affect daily using time. Subjects and Method We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 19 patients who selected BAHA and 9 patients who selected CROS HA to undergo rehabilitation of unilateral hearing loss. Preoperative pure tone air and bone conduction thresholds, BAHA-aided thresholds and CROS HA-aided thresholds were measured. Hearing in noise test (HINT) was measured with unaided and aided in signal to noise ratio 10 (signal 75 dB HL, noise 65 dBA). Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire (BBSS) was evaluated for all patients to assess subjective satisfaction and also, daily device using time was investigated. Results The aided pure tone audiometry was 44.58 dB HL, 42.71 dB HL for in BAHA and CROS HA, respectively, whereas the unaided PTA was 111.29, 103.28 dB HL for BAHA and CROS HA, respectively. The aided HINT was 63.03 and 64.06%, whereas the unaided HINT was 22.13% and 37.44% for BAHA and CROS, respectively. BBSS showed more satisfactory results with BAHA and CROS HA when compared unaided in all items. Daily using time did not correlate with the degree of satisfaction, better ear hearing levels or etiology. Conclusion It was found that not only the preoperative BAHA rod test and HA trials but also the customized and detail counseling were needed for single sided deaf patients to use auditory rehabilitation devices frequently.
Abstract
Background and Objectives There are two ways to route sound from a deaf hemifield to a functional ear: the bone anchored hearing aid (BAHA) and the contralateral routing of signal hearing aid (CROS HA). BAHA uses transcranial bone conduction; on the other hand, CROS HA uses air conduction. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the benefit of these auditory rehabilitation devices objectively and subjectively, and to analyze factors that affect daily using time. Subjects and Method We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 19 patients who selected BAHA and 9 patients who selected CROS HA to undergo rehabilitation of unilateral hearing loss. Preoperative pure tone air and bone conduction thresholds, BAHA-aided thresholds and CROS HA-aided thresholds were measured. Hearing in noise test (HINT) was measured with unaided and aided in signal to noise ratio 10 (signal 75 dB HL, noise 65 dBA). Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness Questionnaire (BBSS) was evaluated for all patients to assess subjective satisfaction and also, daily device using time was investigated. Results The aided pure tone audiometry was 44.58 dB HL, 42.71 dB HL for in BAHA and CROS HA, respectively, whereas the unaided PTA was 111.29, 103.28 dB HL for BAHA and CROS HA, respectively. The aided HINT was 63.03 and 64.06%, whereas the unaided HINT was 22.13% and 37.44% for BAHA and CROS, respectively. BBSS showed more satisfactory results with BAHA and CROS HA when compared unaided in all items. Daily using time did not correlate with the degree of satisfaction, better ear hearing levels or etiology. Conclusion It was found that not only the preoperative BAHA rod test and HA trials but also the customized and detail counseling were needed for single sided deaf patients to use auditory rehabilitation devices frequently.
참고문헌 (16)
- Douglas SA, "Spatial hearing disability after acoustic neuroma removal", Laryngoscope, 117(9), pp.1648~1651 (2007)
- Welsh LW, "Functional impairments due to unilateral deafness", Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 113(12), pp.987~993 (2004)
- Kang SH, "Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. 2nd ed", pp.821~822 (2009), Iljogak
- Lee JH, "Korean Speech Audiometry. 1st ed", pp.2~ (2010), Hakjisa
- Kompis M, "Factors influencing the decision for Baha in unilateral deafness: the Bern benefit in single-sided deafness questionnaire", Adv Otorhinolaryngol, 71, pp.103~111 (2011)
- Lin LM, "Amplification in the rehabilitation of unilateral deafness: speech in noise and directional hearing effects with bone-anchored hearing and contralateral routing of signal amplification", Otol Neurotol, 27(2), pp.172~182 (2006)
- Bronkhorst AW, "Binaural speech intelligibility in noise for hearing-impaired listeners", J Acoust Soc Am, 86(4), pp.1374~1383 (1989)
- Hol MK, "Boneanchored hearing aids in unilateral inner ear deafness: an evaluation of audiometric and patient outcome measurements", Otol Neurotol, 26(5), pp.999~1006 (2005)
- 한규희, "Bone Anchored Hearing Aid(BAHA)를 이용한 청각 재활", 대한이비인후과학회지 두경부외과학, 53(12), pp.755~760 (2010), 대한이비인후과학회
- Gelfand SA, "Usage of CROS hearing aids by unilaterally deaf patients", Arch Otolaryngol, 105(6), pp.328~332 (1979)
- Snik AF, "The bone-anchored hearing aid in patients with a unilateral air-bone gap", Otol Neurotol, 23(1), pp.61~66 (2002)
- Pelosi S, "Soft tissue overgrowth in bone-anchored hearing aid patients: use of 8.5 mm abutment", J Laryngol Otol, 125(6), pp.576~579 (2011)
- Monksfield P, "Experience with the longer (8.5 mm) abutment for Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid", Otol Neurotol, 30(3), pp.274~276 (2009)
- Pfiffner F, "Benefits of low-frequency attenuation of baha® in single-sided sensorineural deafness", Ear Hear, 32(1), pp.40~45 (2011)
- Snik AF, "Consensus statements on the BAHA system: where do we stand at present?", Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl, 195, pp.2~12 (2005)
- Wazen JJ, "Localization by unilateral BAHA users", Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 132(6), pp.928~932 (2005)