A comparison of the audiometric performance of bone anchored hearing aids and air conduction hearing aids

Otology and Neurotology

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 912-919

  Bance, Manohar ^a,c   Abel, Sharon M ^b   Papsin, Blake C ^b   Wade, Philip ^b   Vendramini, Judy ^b  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c Victoria General Site ^*  (Canada)

Author keywords

Air conduction hearing aids; Bone anchored hearing aids; Chronic suppurative otitis media

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDIOMETRY; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BONE CONDUCTION; CHRONIC OTITIS MEDIA; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HEARING TEST; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; ADOLESCENT; AGED; CHRONIC DISEASE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONDUCTION DEAFNESS; IMPLANTATION; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESIS; PSYCHOPHYSICS; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SUPPURATIVE OTITIS MEDIA;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BONE CONDUCTION; CHRONIC DISEASE; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, CONDUCTIVE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OTITIS MEDIA, SUPPURATIVE; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS;

EID: 0036835328     PISSN: 15317129     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00129492-200211000-00017     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Arlinger S, Kylen P. Bone conducted stimulation in electrocochleography. Acta Otolaryngol 1977;84:377.
2. Håkansson B, Tjellström A, Rosenhall U. Hearing thresholds with direct bone conduction versus conventional bone conduction. Scand Audiol 1984;13:3-13.
3. Mylanus EAM, Snik AFM, Cremers CWRJ. The influence of the thickness of the skin and subcutaneous tissue covering the mastoid on bone-conduction thresholds obtained transcutaneously versus percutaneously. Scand Audiol 1994;23:201-3.
4. Håkansson B, Liden B, Tjellström A, et al. The bone anchored hearing aid: principal design and audiometric results. Ear Nose Throat J 1994;73:670-5.
5. Cooper H, Burrell S, Powell R, et al. The Birmingham bone anchored hearing aid programme: referrals, selection, rehabilitation, philosophy and adult results. J Laryngol Otol 1996;21(Suppl):13-20.
6. MacNamara M, Phillips D, Proops D. The bone anchored hearing aid (BAHA) in chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) J Laryngol Otol 1996;21(Suppl):38-40.
7. Browning G, Gatehouse S. Estimation of the benefit of boneanchored hearing aids. Ann Laryngol Otol 1994;103:872-8.
8. Håkansson B, Liden B, Tjellström A, et al. Ten years with the Swedish bone-anchored hearing system. Ann Laryngol Otol 1990;(Suppl)151:1-16.
9. Cremers CW, Snik FM, Benyon AJ. Hearing with the bone anchored hearing aid (BAHA, HC 200) compared with a conventional bone conduction hearing aid. Clin Otolaryngol 1992;7:275-9.
10. Mylanus EAM, van der Pouw KCTM, Snik AFM, et al. Intraindividual comparison of bone-anchored hearing aid and airconduction hearing aids. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998;124:271-6.
11. Bergman M. Aging and the Perception of Speech. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1980.
12. Miller GA, Licklider JCR. The intelligibility of interrupted speech. J Acoust Soc Am 1950;22:167-73.
13. Bergman M, Blumenfeld VG, Cascardo D, et al. Age-related decrement in hearing for speech. J Gerontol 1950;31:533-8.
14. Sticht TG, Gray BB. The intelligibility of time compressed words as a function of age and hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res 1969;12:443-8.
15. Abel SM, Krever EM, Alberti PW. Auditory detection, discrimination and speech processing in ageing, noise-sensitive and hearing-impaired listeners. Scand Audiol 1990;19:43-54.
16. Schneider BA, Pichora-Fuller MK, Kowalchuk D, et al. Gap detection and the precedence effect in young and old adults. J Acoust Soc Am 1994;78:980-91.
17. Abel SM. Duration discrimination of noise and tone-bursts. J Acoust Soc Am 1972;51:1219-23.
18. Abel SM. The discrimination of temporal gaps. J Acoust Soc Am 1972;52:519-24.
19. Irwin RJ, McAuley SF. Relations among temporal acuity, hearing loss, and the perception of speech distorted by noise and reverberation. J Acoust Soc Am 1987;81:1557-65.
20. Dubno JR, Dirks DD, Schaefer AB. Effects of hearing loss on utilization of short-duration spectral cues in stop consonant recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 1987;81:1940-7.
21. Divenyi PL, Haupt KM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss: I. Age and lateral symmetry effects. Ear Hear 1997;18:42-61.
22. Abel SM. Indices of communication handicap in mildly hearing-impaired listeners. Proceedings of Acoustics Week in Canada, Toronto, Canada. Canad Acoust 1993;21:25-6.
23. Sanders DA. Hearing aid orientation and counseling. In Pollack MC, ed. Amplification for the Hearing Impaired. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1975:343-91.
24. Medical Outcomes Trust. The MOS SF-36 Health Survey. Boston, 1994.
25. Giguère C, Abel SM. A multi-purpose facility for research on hearing protection. Appl Acoust 1990;31:295-311.
26. Yantis PA. Puretone air-conduction testing. In Katz J. Handbook of Clinical Audiology, 3rd ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1985:153-69.
27. Green DM, Swets JA. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. New York: John Wiley, 1966.
28. Foster JR, Haggard MP. FAAF - An efficient analytical test of speech perception. Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics. MRC Institute of Hearing Research, Nottingham, England, 1979:9-12.
29. ANSI S3.6. Specification for Audiometers. New York: American National Standards Institute, 1996.
30. Shaw EA, Vaillancourt MM. Transformation of sound-pressure level from the free field to the eardrum presented in numerical form. J Acoust Soc Am 1985;78:1120-3.
31. Kuhn GF. The pressure transformation from a diffuse sound field to the external ear and to the body and head surface. J Acoust Soc Am 1979;65:991-1000.