The Prediction of Speech Recognition in Noise With a Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing System by External Bone Conduction Stimulation With Headband: A Prospective Study.
Friedrich Ihler, Jenny Blum, Max-Ulrich Berger and 3 others
PMID 27698259WHAT IT FOUND
External bone conduction stimulation with a headband predicted speech-in-noise results for an implanted device in eight patients.
While objective hearing scores did not differ significantly between the two, patients reported much higher satisfaction and quality of life with the implant.
Key findings
01Speech recognition in noise improved significantly from unaided conditions with both external stimulation and the implanted device, but there was no significant difference in performance between the two devices.
02The results from external headband stimulation strongly correlated with the results from the implanted device, suggesting the external trial can predict post-implant performance.
03Patients reported significantly better quality of life and subjective hearing benefit with the implanted device compared to external stimulation, despite similar objective speech scores.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only eight patients, limiting the generalizability of the findings. The design was not blinded; patients had already used the implant for three months before trying the external device, which likely influenced their subjective ratings. All implants were placed in a retrosigmoidal position due to complex middle ear histories, which may affect results compared to standard mastoid placement. The external device was worn for only one week, which may not reflect long-term adaptation or comfort.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the external headband device is a suitable long-term alternative to the implant. Although objective speech scores were similar, patients reported significantly better quality of life and satisfaction with the implant, and the external trial's short duration and non-blinded nature likely skewed subjective results.