OBJECTIVES: To evaluate complication rates and outcomes of children with Down syndrome fitted with a Bone Anchored Hearing Aid (Baha). To evaluate whether the Bone Anchored Hearing Aid is a successful form of aural rehabilitation in children with Down syndrome from a patients' perspective. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case analysis and postal questionnaire study. SETTING: The Birmingham Children's Hospital, UK. METHODS: A total of 15 children were fitted with a Baha between February 1992 and February 2007. The age range was 2-15 years. A postal questionnaire was sent to each family. The Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory (GCBI) was used in this study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Implantation results, skin reactions and other complications were recorded. Quality of life after receiving a Baha was assessed with the GCBI. RESULTS: All 15 patients are using their Baha 7 days a week for more than 8h a day after a follow-up of 14 months with continuing audiological benefit. No fixtures were lost, and skin problems were encountered in 3 (20%). Regarding quality of life, all 15 patients had improved social and physical functioning as a result of better hearing. CONCLUSIONS: Baha has an important role in the overall management of individuals with Down syndrome after conventional hearing aids and/or ventilation tubes have been considered or already failed. This study has shown a 20% rate of soft tissue reaction and there were no fixture losses in this group. No significant increase in complication rates was identified in children with Down syndrome. Finally, there was a significantly improved quality of life in children with Down syndrome after receiving their Baha. There was a high patient/carer satisfaction with Baha. Two of our series had bilateral two stage fixture procedures without any complications. More consideration should be given to bilateral bone anchored hearing aids in this group.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate complication rates and outcomes of children with Down syndrome fitted with a Bone Anchored Hearing Aid (Baha). To evaluate whether the Bone Anchored Hearing Aid is a successful form of aural rehabilitation in children with Down syndrome from a patients' perspective. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case analysis and postal questionnaire study. SETTING: The Birmingham Children's Hospital, UK. METHODS: A total of 15 children were fitted with a Baha between February 1992 and February 2007. The age range was 2-15 years. A postal questionnaire was sent to each family. The Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory (GCBI) was used in this study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Implantation results, skin reactions and other complications were recorded. Quality of life after receiving a Baha was assessed with the GCBI. RESULTS: All 15 patients are using their Baha 7 days a week for more than 8h a day after a follow-up of 14 months with continuing audiological benefit. No fixtures were lost, and skin problems were encountered in 3 (20%). Regarding quality of life, all 15 patients had improved social and physical functioning as a result of better hearing. CONCLUSIONS: Baha has an important role in the overall management of individuals with Down syndrome after conventional hearing aids and/or ventilation tubes have been considered or already failed. This study has shown a 20% rate of soft tissue reaction and there were no fixture losses in this group. No significant increase in complication rates was identified in children with Down syndrome. Finally, there was a significantly improved quality of life in children with Down syndrome after receiving their Baha. There was a high patient/carer satisfaction with Baha. Two of our series had bilateral two stage fixture procedures without any complications. More consideration should be given to bilateral bone anchored hearing aids in this group.
Authors: Hubert T Faber; Maarten J F de Wolf; Cor W R J Cremers; Ad F M Snik; Myrthe K S Hol Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2012-08-19 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Furqan A Shah; Martin L Johansson; Omar Omar; Hanna Simonsson; Anders Palmquist; Peter Thomsen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-06-14 Impact factor: 3.240