Preliminary comparison of bone-anchored hearing instruments and a dental device as treatments for unilateral hearing loss

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of two types of treatment for unilateral hearing loss (UHL), bone-anchored hearing instruments (BAHI) and a dental device (SoundBite). Design: Either BAHI or SoundBite were worn for 30 days, and then the devices were swapped and the second device was worn for 30 days. Measures included unaided and aided sound-field thresholds, sound localization, and perception of speech in babble. The APHAB questionnaire was administered for each trial period. Study sample: Nine adult BAHI wearers with UHL. Results: Mid-frequency aided thresholds were lower for SoundBite than for BAHI. Both devices gave benefits for localization after 30 days, but there was no difference between devices. Speech perception was better for both devices than for unaided listening when the target speech came from the poorer hearing side or in front, and the interfering babble came from the better-hearing side. There was no consistent difference between devices. APHAB scores were better for SoundBite than for BAHI. Conclusions: Speech perception and sound localization were similar for the two types of device, but the SoundBite led to lower aided thresholds and better APHAB scores than the BAHI.

Key Words::

• Unilateral hearing loss
• single-sided deafness
• bone conduction
• bone-anchored hearing device
• speech perception
• sound localization

Acknowledgments

We thank Amir Abolfathi and Tim Proulx for helpful discussions and three anonymous reviewers for very helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper.

Declaration of interest: Both authors are paid members of the Scientific Advisory Board of Sonitus Medical.

The work of author BCJM was supported by the Medical Research Council UK (grant G0701870).