Search

In France, with the "100% santé" reform, the sales of hearing aids were multiplied by 4.5 between 2019 and 2021. Multiple comparisons between class I (100% covered by healthcare) and II hearing aid devices were already conducted for mild to moderate hearing loss but none of them investigated the severe degree of hearing loss. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, 18 adults with a severe hearing loss and already equipped with hearing aids were recruited. They were randomly divided into two groups and underwent 3 assessments in 3 times (with 15-day intervals): 1) fit with a class I or II hearing device, 2) Fitting with the other class of hearing aid, APHAB and hearing assessments and 3) APHAB and final hearing assessments. Overall results did not show any statistical differences between class I and II for patients with severe hearing loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assessing the effectiveness of hearing aid fittings based on the benefits they provide is crucial but intricate. While objective metrics of hearing aids like gain, frequency response, and distortion are measurable, they do not directly indicate user benefits. Hearing aid performance assessment encompasses various aspects, such as compensating for hearing loss and user satisfaction. The authors suggest enhancing the widely used APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) questionnaire by integrating it with the MUSHRA test. APHAB, a self-completed questionnaire for users, evaluates specific sound scenarios on a seven-point scale, with each point described by a letter, percentage, and description. Given the complexities, especially for older users, we propose converting the seven-point APHAB scale to a clearer 100-point MUSHRA scale using fuzzy logic rules. The paper starts with presenting the goals of the study, focused on the assessment of the benefits of hearing aid use, especially in the case of the elderly population. The introductory part includes an overview of methods for evaluating the effectiveness of hearing aid use. Then, the methodology for the data collection is presented. This is followed by a method modification that combines the MUSHRA (MUltiple Stimuli with Hidden Reference and Anchor) test and fuzzy logic processing and the commonly used hearing aid benefit assessment questionnaire, APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit). The results of such a process are examined. A summary of the findings is given in the form of fuzzy logic-based rules, followed by a short discussion. Finally, the overall conclusion and possible future directions for the method development are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) are two most commonly used questionnaires in the audiology clinic to assess an individual’s self-perception of their hearing ability. Here, we present the outcomes of these two questionnaires on a large group of self-reported normal hearing adult listeners. A total of 254 self-reported normal-hearing younger and older adults completed the SSQ and the APHAB questionnaire. The younger participants completed the questionnaires through Qualtrics, whereas the older participants completed the questionnaire through Qualtrics and a traditional pen-and-paper method. The younger listeners perceived a higher ability compared to the older adults in all the SSQ subscales (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities) and reported a lesser frequency of the problems in three of the four APHAB subscales (Ease of communication, Reverberation, and Background Noise). There was no significant difference in the frequency of the problems reported in the Aversiveness subscale. Self-reported normal-hearing listeners do not rate their listening ability at the top of the ability scale. Additionally, the large dataset presented here has a potential normative value for the SSQ and the APHAB questionnaires for self-reported normal-hearing adult listeners.

Purpose: Hearing impairment has a high impact on communication between cancer patients and their oncologists. What is the patient's perspective on this problem and how can physicians draw lessons from it? Methods: Together with otorhinolaryngologists and hearing-impaired patients, we developed a questionnaire including the sections: WHO (Five) Well-Being Index (5 items), Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) as established self-estimation of hearing function (24 items), use of hearing aid (4 items) as well as patients' experiences (15 items), difficulties (9 items) and wishes (7 items) regarding the communication with physicians. The experiences, difficulties, wishes, and life satisfaction of cancer patients were analyzed between groups based on participants' APHAB scores, well-being and use of hearing aids. A total of 104 cancer survivors (median age 76.5 years, range 32–90 years) were included. Results: Between the groups of subjectively hearing-impaired and normal hearing participants, we registered a significant difference in difficulties in conversation, wishes for physician–patient communication and psychological well-being. Depending on participants' well-being, wishes and difficulties differed. Differences were also found between participants with and without hearing aids in terms of difficulties in conversation, but not in terms of their wishes and well-being. A large proportion of participants classified as subjectively hearing-impaired according to APHAB already had a hearing aid. Conclusions: Cancer patients with hearing loss are very restricted in their understanding of given information and hearing aid use cannot completely compensate for this. Consequently, communication guidelines should be considered and specific educational tools need to be developed for these groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) are two most commonly used questionnaires in the audiology clinic to assess an individual's self-perception of their hearing ability. Here, we present the outcomes of these two questionnaires on a large group of self-reported normal hearing adult listeners. A total of 254 self-reported normal-hearing younger and older adults completed the SSQ and the APHAB questionnaire. The younger participants completed the questionnaires through Qualtrics, whereas the older participants completed the questionnaire through Qualtrics and a traditional pen-and-paper method. The younger listeners perceived a higher ability compared to the older adults in all the SSQ subscales (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities) and reported a lesser frequency of the problems in three of the four APHAB subscales (Ease of communication, Reverberation, and Background Noise). There was no significant difference in the frequency of the problems reported in the Aversiveness subscale. Self-reported normal-hearing listeners do not rate their listening ability at the top of the ability scale. Additionally, the large dataset presented here has a potential normative value for the SSQ and the APHAB questionnaires for self-reported normal-hearing adult listeners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the Baha® Attract system implantation on the quality of life of hearing-impaired patients, who were qualified for surgery due to various audiological indications. METHODS: A total of 96 patients implanted with the Baha® Attract system were asked to fill in the set of questionnaires: the Glasgow Benefit Inventory, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing-Aid Benefit, and the BAHA Aesthetic, Hygiene, and Use. Totally 79 patients responded and were then analyzed. Patients were divided into 4 groups: A: with bilateral mixed or conductive hearing loss, B: with single-sided deafness, C: with unilateral mixed or conductive hearing loss, and D: others. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in quality of life measured by the Glasgow Benefit Inventory in all the analyzed groups, with a mean total score of 29.4 points (P < .001). Similarly, the evaluation by the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit questionnaire showed a significant improvement in terms of the global score in all the analyzed groups, with a mean gain of 38.6% (P < .001). There were no differences between the groups. More than 90% of patients found the Baha® Attract system easy to place on their heads and maintain good hygiene. Of all the implant users, 81% were satisfied with the final aesthetic effect. CONCLUSION: The implantation of the Baha® Attract system significantly improves the quality of life of hearing-impaired patients in all subjective scales used. The system is effective for all audiological indications when strictly adhered to. The majority of patients are very satisfied with the aesthetic, hygienic, and utility aspects of the device. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Assessing cochlear implant (CI)-associated patient outcomes is a focus of implant research. Most studies have analyzed outcomes retrospectively with low patient numbers and few measurement time points. In addition, standardized CI-specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments have not been used. To address this, we prospectively assessed HRQoL in patients before and after implantation. Methods: We assessed HRQoL using the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ), Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), Hearing Participation Scale (HPS), and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in 100 deaf or severely hearing-impaired patients (57 unilaterally deaf and 43 bilaterally deaf) before and 3, 6, and 12 months after cochlear implantation. We compared the results of unilaterally and bilaterally hearing-impaired patients and patients with or without a hearing aid. Principal component (PCA) and exploratory factor analyses (EFA) were also conducted. Results: The NCIQ measured improvements in all 6 domains after CI and correlated well with other QoL instruments. The PCA revealed that the NCIQ can be better explained by physical, physical advanced, and socio-psychological components. The APHAB score ameliorated over time, except for the background noise domain. The overall HPS score improved over time, but the hearing handicap subscore significantly decreased. Sociodemographic influences on the questionnaire scores were relatively weak. Conclusion: Assessing HRQoL is essential for quantifying the patient outcome after CI. NCIQ scores in our patient cohort showed improved HRQoL in all domains and we recommend that the NCIQ be used as a first-line questionnaire for assessing QoL in hearing-impaired patients after CI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper presents the development of a method for assessing auditory perception and the effectiveness of applying hearing aids for hard-of-hearing people during short-term (up to 7 days) and longer-term (up to 3 months) use. The method consists of a survey based on the APHAB questionnaire. Additional criteria such as the degree of hearing loss, technological level of hearing aids used, as well as the user experience are taken into consideration. A web-based application is developed, allowing answering the survey questions from any computer with Internet access. The results of the benefit obtained from the use of hearing aids in various acoustic environments, taking into account the time of their use, are presented and compared to the earlier outcomes. The research results show that in the first period of use of hearing aids, speech perception improves, especially in noisy environments. The perception of unpleasant sounds also increases, which may lead to deterioration of hearing aid acceptance by their users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To analyze the performance of cochlear implants in French patients aged 65 and over, implanted between 2012 and 2016, using data from the French national registry for cochlear implants (EPIIC). The French national registry incorporates patient data from before implantation and for three years after implantation, stratified in different age groups (18–39, 40–64 years, 65–74 years and > 75 years). Here, we assessed the latter two categories. Hearing was assessed using mono- and disyllabic words in a silent background. The Category of Auditory Performance (CAP) scale was also implemented and subjects took the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (Aphab) questionnaire. The population aged over 65 accounted for 38% (n = 1193) of the 3178 adult implanted patients. The performance for mono- and disyllabic words in silence, the CAP scores and the APHAB questionnaire answers for ease of communication, background noise and reverberation were dramatically improved at one year post-implantation (P < 0.0001 for each score) and remained stable between one and three years thereafter. The percentage improvement was similar across all age groups. The scores for loud-noise intolerance did not change after cochlear implantation in any age group. Cochlear implants improve hearing and communication in subjects aged 65 and over, with comparable efficiency to that achieved in younger subjects. Cochlear implantation should thus be proposed whenever hearing aids provide only limited benefit. However, between 2012 and 2016, cochlear implantation was given to less than 1% of the French population aged 65 and over with profound deafness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the performance of an active transcutaneous implantable-bone conduction device (TI-BCD), and to evaluate the benefit of device digital signal processing (DSP) features in challenging listening environments. Design: Participants were tested at 1- and 3-month post-activation of the TI-BCD. At each session, aided and unaided phoneme perception was assessed using the Ling-6 test. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) and quality ratings of speech and music samples were collected in noisy and reverberant environments, with and without the DSP features. Self-assessment of the device performance was obtained using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire. Study sample: Six adults with conductive or mixed hearing loss. Results: Average SRTs were 2.9 and 12.3 dB in low and high reverberation environments, respectively, which improved to −1.7 and 8.7 dB, respectively with the DSP features. In addition, speech quality ratings improved by 23 points with the DSP features when averaged across all environmental conditions. Improvement scores on APHAB scales revealed a statistically significant aided benefit. Conclusions: Noise and reverberation significantly impacted speech recognition performance and perceived sound quality. DSP features (directional microphone processing and adaptive noise reduction) significantly enhanced subjects' performance in these challenging listening environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Bonebridge implant can be a satisfactory solution for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss (CHL or MHL), or with single-sided deafness (SSD). The aim of the study was to assess patients’ self-reported benefits with the Bonebridge and characterize the relationships between pre-implantation audiometric data, auditory functioning, and satisfaction after implantation. A focus was to see whether different types of hearing loss were associated with particular benefits. The study sample consisted of 81 patients. Procedures comprised pure tone audiometry before implantation, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire, and a structured interview asking about satisfaction. Statistically significant improvements after implantation were found in all groups (CHL, MHL, SSD) on the APHAB questionnaire. In the structured interview, patients with SSD were the least satisfied. No significant correlation was found between pre-operative air-bone gap and bone conduction thresholds or with APHAB score. Bonebridge implantation is beneficial to patients with CHL or MHL, or with SSD. Assessment of patients for Bonebridge implantation is complex, and audiometric data should be complemented by patient-reported outcomes to provide deeper insight into their individual needs and attitudes.

Objective To investigate the hearing performance of adult patients presenting unilateral deafness with contralateral fluctuating hearing loss who received a cochlear implant on the deaf side. Study Design Case series with chart review. Setting University tertiary referral center. Subjects and Methods Preoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively, 23 patients underwent pure tone audiometry and speech audiometry with disyllabic and monosyllabic words in a quiet environment and sentences in quiet and noisy (signal-to-noise ratio +10 dB SPL) environments under best-aided conditions. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) inventory was evaluated preoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Results No difference was found between pre- and postoperative tests for disyllabic and monosyllabic words. For sentences in quiet and noisy environments, a difference between pre- and postoperative performance was present at 1 year ( P = .002 and P = .02, respectively). In a noisy environment, a difference was present at 6 and 12 months postoperatively as compared with the preoperative value (mean ± SD: 6 months: 42% ± 7.1% vs 61% ± 6.5%, P = .016). A significant improvement in the APHAB score was found at 6 and 12 months postimplantation (Friedman's 2-way analysis of variance by ranks, P < .001). The number of years of hearing deprivation of the deaf ear was not correlated with performance. Conclusion When incapacitating fluctuating hearing loss occurs in patients presenting a contralateral deaf ear, a cochlear implant is indicated in the latter ear, significantly improving performance in noisy conditions and allowing a better quality of communication to be achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Subjective hearing loss in hearing-impaired patients can be assessed by inventory questionnaires. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB) measures subjective hearing loss in four typical hearing situations (subscales). It is used to fit hearing aids in patients with statutory insurance in Germany. In addition, the unaided APHAB (APHAB) can be used as a primary diagnostic instrument in audiology. There are no published data regarding the sensitivity and specificity of the unaided APHAB. Therefore, we investigated these parameters for detecting hearing loss of at least 25 dB at any frequency between 0.5 and 8.0 kHz. We used the APHAB to determine hearing loss in 245 subjects aged 50 years and older without any reported disease of the ears. Due to incomplete answering of the APHAB form, 55 subjects have been excluded. We also measured the pure-tone thresholds by air conduction for all octave frequencies between 0.5 and 8 kHz. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the Youden Index were used to determine the diagnostic value of the APHAB, particularly sensitivity and specificity, in three different ways: (1) separately for ease of communication (EC), background noise (BN), and hearing with reverberation (RV) subscales; (2) with the mean value of EC, BN, and RV; and (3) with a logistic regression model. The area under the ROC curve was lower for BN only (0.83) and nearly equal for all other methods (0.87-0.89). Depending on how we performed the analyses, the sensitivity of the APHAB was 0.70-0.84 (single subscales), 0.76 (mean value of EC, BN, and RV), or 0.85 (logistic regression model). The specificity was 0.79-0.95. The use of single APHAB subscales for determining the sensitivity and specificity of the APHAB due to confusing results. In comparison, the use of the mean value of EC, BN, and RV and the use of the logistic regression model due to equal values in the ROC curves but a higher sensitivity in the logistic regression model. Therefore, we would recommend the last method for determining the sensitivity and specificity of the APHAB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire reports subjective hearing impairments in four typical conditions. We investigated the association between the frequency-specific probability of hearing loss and scores from the unaided APHAB (APHAB) to determine whether the APHAB could be useful in primary diagnoses of hearing loss, in addition to pure tone and speech audiometry. This retrospective study included database records from 6558 patients (average age 69.0 years). We employed a multivariate generalised linear mixed model to analyse the probabilities of hearing losses (severity range 20-75 dB, evaluated in 5-dB steps), measured at different frequencies (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, and 8.0 kHz), for nearly all combinations of APHAB subscale scores (subscale scores from 20 to 80%, evaluated in steps of 5%). We calculated the probability of hearing loss for 28,561 different combinations of APHAB subscale scores (results available online). In general, the probability of hearing loss was positively associated with the combined APHAB score (i.e. increasing probability with increasing scores). However, this association was negative at one frequency (8 kHz). The highest probabilities were for a hearing loss of 45 dB at test frequency 2.0 kHz, but with a wide spreading. We showed that the APHAB subscale scores were associated with the probability of hearing loss measured with audiometry. This information could enrich the expert's evaluation of the subject's hearing loss, and it might help resolve suspicious cases of aggravation. The 0.5 and 8.0 kHz frequencies influenced hearing loss less than the frequencies in-between, and 2.0 kHz was most influential on intermediate degree hearing loss (around 45 dB), which corresponded to the frequency-dependence of speech intelligibility measured with speech audiometry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hearing loss can be measured by pure-tone and speech audiometry. The subjective hearing impairment can be assessed using questionnaires. The APHAB determines this for four typical hearing situations. It has not been researched previously whether a particular frequency-specific hearing loss leads to a particular unaided APHAB score in one of the subscales or not. Clarification could be helpful using the unaided APHAB as an instrument for primary diagnostics of hearing loss independently of whether hearing aids were subsequently fitted or not. A total of 4546 records from a database were analysed; the average age of the subjects was 69.3 years. Using a multivariant mixed linear model, a possible correlation was examined between a frequency-specific hearing loss (0.5-8.0 kHz) and particular unaided APHAB scores for its subscales. Furthermore, it was determined whether the subject's gender has a corresponding impact. There was no evidence of gender-specific dependence of the unaided APHAB scores. For the EC scale frequencies above 0.5 kHz, for the RV scale all frequencies and for the AV scale the frequencies at 1.0 and 2.0 kHz showed a significant correlation between hearing loss and the APHAB score. For each decibel of hearing loss there was an average rise in the APHAB score for the EC and RV scale of approximately 0.2 percentage points and an average decrease in the AV scale of 0.1 percentage points for each frequency. For the BN scale there was no evidence of this kind of correlation. The very varied possibility between individuals compensating for hearing loss in situations with background noises could be that there is no correlation between frequency-specific hearing loss and an associated unaided APHAB score. The described frequency-specific influence of hearing loss to the EC and RV score could be explained by fewer compensating possibilities for the patients in these specific hearing situations than for the BN scale described. Using the unaided APHAB form in primary diagnostics of hearing impairment is helpful for understanding individual problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/hypothesis: To examine the long-term satisfaction and possible effects of gender in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) who underwent bone-anchored hearing implant (BAHI) surgery.Study Design: Retrospective case-control study.Methods: All (n = 145) consecutive SSD patients fitted with a BAHI between January 2001 and October 2011 were asked to complete a questionnaire consisting of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), the Communication Profile for the Hearing Impaired (CPHI), and the SSD questionnaire.Results: Twenty-three of the 135 responding patients (17%) reported discontinuation of the device over an average follow-up time of 61.7 months. No significant differences were found in the degree of disability or coping between men and women, according to the APHAB and CPHI scores. Improvement in quality of life and appreciation of the BAHI were not affected by gender, age, directional hearing ability, and handling of the device. The appearance of the device positively affected their appreciation. At the mean follow-up time of 117 months, 69.2% was using their BAHI. In the domains background noise, reverberant surroundings, and aversion to sounds, the mean APHAB scores were significantly changed at 3 months, 1 year, and 10 years after implantation.Conclusion: Our study examined the results of BAHI use in SSD patients over a relatively long follow-up period, with an average of 5 years. The majority of users (83%) were satisfied with the device. No significant gender differences were in terms of reported appreciation, hearing disability, or coping with a BAHI.Level Of Evidence: 3b. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of HNO is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of HNO is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of HNO is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objectives/Hypothesis: A study performed in the 1990s with analogue linear hearing aids showed that in patients with mixed hearing loss and an air-bone gap that exceeded 25 to 30 dB, speech perception was better with a bone-anchored hearing aid (Baha) than with a conventional behind-the-ear (BTE) device. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether this conclusion applies to today’s digital BTEs with feedback cancellation and whether the crossover point still occurs at an air-bone gap of 25 to 30 dB. Study Design: Case control. Methods: Experienced unilateral Baha users with the latest digital Baha processors were fitted with a powerful BTE with feedback cancellation. After an acclimatization period of 4 weeks, aided thresholds and speech recognition scores were determined and compared to those recorded previously with the Baha. To obtain patients’ opinions, a disability specific questionnaire was used. Participants comprised 16 subjects with bilateral mixed hearing loss participated. Results: Audiometric and speech recognition data showed similar trends to those described previously, but the crossover point had shifted to an air-bone gap of 30 to 35 dB. In the questionnaire, the BTE was rated higher than the Baha, except by the patients with an air-bone gap that exceeded an average of 45 dB. Conclusions: In patients with mixed hearing loss whose air-bone gap exceeded 35 dB, speech recognition is likely to be better with a Baha than with a BTE. Therefore, the Baha should receive greater consideration when mixed hearing loss is combined with a significant air-bone gap, even when there are no contraindications for BTEs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/Hypothesis: Determine the benefit of the bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) in patients with unilateral deafness. Study Design: Retrospective case series and prospective questionnaire study at a tertiary referral center. Methods: Patients with unilateral deafness of various etiologies who were implanted with a BAHA (n = 126) or not implanted with a BAHA after a translabyrinthine craniotomy (n = 126) were mailed questionnaires. A total of 139 patients (55%) responded to the questionnaires. Patients who were implanted with a BAHA received a general questionnaire concerning BAHA usage, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Questionnaire (SSQ). Patients not implanted with a BAHA received only the SSQ hearing questionnaire. Results: Patients with unilateral deafness demonstrated a benefit with BAHA use on the APHAB. Most improvement with the BAHA was seen in the Background Noise subscale, with a 17.4% improvement. Ease of Communication and Reverberation subscales also demonstrated an 11.6% and 13.2% benefit, respectively. Patients with a BAHA demonstrated better scores in the SSQ Speech subscale when compared to unilaterally deaf patients who did not have a BAHA, although this difference was not significant. Conclusions: The APHAB demonstrated significant benefit with the use of a BAHA in patients with unilateral deafness. Although the SSQ speech subscale showed overall improvement in auditory disability with the use of a BAHA, this difference was not significant. However, the SSQ hearing questionnaire demonstrated specific situations were the BAHA is most useful. Laryngoscope, 2010 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differences in performance between unaided and aided performance (omnidirectional and directional) were measured using an open-fit behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aid. Twenty-six subjects without prior experience with amplification were fitted bilaterally using the manufacturer's recommended procedure. After wearing the hearing aids for one week, the fitting parameters were fine-tuned, based on subjective comments. Four weeks later, differences in performance between unaided and aided (omnidirectional and directional) were assessed by measuring reception thresholds for sentences (RTS in dB), using HINT sentences presented at 0° with R-SpaceTM restaurant noise held constant at 65dBA and presented via eight loudspeakers set 45° apart. In addition, the APHAB was administered to assess subjective impressions of the experimental aid. Results revealed that significant differences in RTS (in dB) were present between directional and omnidirectional performance, as well as directional and unaided performance. Aided omnidirectional performance, however, was not significantly different from unaided performance. These findings suggest for the hearing aids and experimental condition used in this study, a patient would require directional microphones in order to perform significantly better than unaided or aided with omnidirectional microphones, and that performance with an omnidirectional microphone would not be significantly better than unaided. Finally, the APHAB-aided scores were significantly better than unaided scores for the EC, BN, RV, and AV subscales indicating the subjects, on average, perceived the experimental aid to provide significantly better performance than unaided, and that aided performance was more aversive than unaided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Bonebridge implant can be a satisfactory solution for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss (CHL or MHL), or with single-sided deafness (SSD). The aim of the study was to assess patients' self-reported benefits with the Bonebridge and characterize the relationships between pre-implantation audiometric data, auditory functioning, and satisfaction after implantation. A focus was to see whether different types of hearing loss were associated with particular benefits. The study sample consisted of 81 patients. Procedures comprised pure tone audiometry before implantation, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire, and a structured interview asking about satisfaction. Statistically significant improvements after implantation were found in all groups (CHL, MHL, SSD) on the APHAB questionnaire. In the structured interview, patients with SSD were the least satisfied. No significant correlation was found between pre-operative air-bone gap and bone conduction thresholds or with APHAB score. Bonebridge implantation is beneficial to patients with CHL or MHL, or with SSD. Assessment of patients for Bonebridge implantation is complex, and audiometric data should be complemented by patient-reported outcomes to provide deeper insight into their individual needs and attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To analyze the performance of cochlear implants in French patients aged 65 and over, implanted between 2012 and 2016, using data from the French national registry for cochlear implants (EPIIC)., Materials and Methods: The French national registry incorporates patient data from before implantation and for three years after implantation, stratified in different age groups (18-39, 40-64years, 65-74years and>75years). Here, we assessed the latter two categories. Hearing was assessed using mono- and disyllabic words in a silent background. The Category of Auditory Performance (CAP) scale was also implemented and subjects took the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (Aphab) questionnaire., Results: The population aged over 65 accounted for 38% (n=1193) of the 3178 adult implanted patients. The performance for mono- and disyllabic words in silence, the CAP scores and the APHAB questionnaire answers for ease of communication, background noise and reverberation were dramatically improved at one year post-implantation (P<0.0001 for each score) and remained stable between one and three years thereafter. The percentage improvement was similar across all age groups. The scores for loud-noise intolerance did not change after cochlear implantation in any age group., Conclusion: Cochlear implants improve hearing and communication in subjects aged 65 and over, with comparable efficiency to that achieved in younger subjects. Cochlear implantation should thus be proposed whenever hearing aids provide only limited benefit. However, between 2012 and 2016, cochlear implantation was given to less than 1% of the French population aged 65 and over with profound deafness., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate both monaural and binaural processing skills in a group of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and to determine the degree to which personal frequency modulation (radio transmission) (FM) listening systems could ameliorate their listening difficulties., Study Design: Auditory temporal processing (amplitude modulation detection), spatial listening (integration of binaural difference cues), and functional hearing (speech perception in background noise) were evaluated in 20 children with ASD. Ten of these subsequently underwent a 6-week device trial in which they wore the FM system for up to 7 hours per day., Results: Auditory temporal processing and spatial listening ability were poorer in subjects with ASD than in matched controls (temporal: P = .014 [95% CI -6.4 to -0.8 dB], spatial: P = .003 [1.0 to 4.4 dB]), and performance on both of these basic processing measures was correlated with speech perception ability (temporal: r = -0.44, P = .022; spatial: r = -0.50, P = .015). The provision of FM listening systems resulted in improved discrimination of speech in noise (P < .001 [11.6% to 21.7%]). Furthermore, both participant and teacher questionnaire data revealed device-related benefits across a range of evaluation categories including Effect of Background Noise (P = .036 [-60.7% to -2.8%]) and Ease of Communication (P = .019 [-40.1% to -5.0%]). Eight of the 10 participants who undertook the 6-week device trial remained consistent FM users at study completion., Conclusions: Sustained use of FM listening devices can enhance speech perception in noise, aid social interaction, and improve educational outcomes in children with ASD., (Copyright © 2014 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)