Literature DB >> 24377490

Bone-anchored hearing aid: why do some patients refuse it?

Faisal Zawawi1, Ghassan Kabbach1, Marie Lallemand1, Sam J Daniel2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA™) is a proven tool to improve hearing. Nevertheless, there are patients who are candidates for BAHA™ implants that end up refusing the surgery. The objective of this study is to review our BAHA™ experience with particular emphasis on reasons behind the refusal of some candidates.
METHODS: A prospective cohort of 100 consecutive new candidates referred to The BAHA™ program in a tertiary health care center. Candidates' demographics, hearing status, Co-morbidities and audiometeric tests were all recorded. Patients' acceptance or refusal was noted alongside the reasons to refuse BAHA™.
RESULTS: 100 new candidates were seen for BAHA™ assessment, 10 patients were excluded due to incomplete data. There were 68 children and 22 adults. Unilateral Conductive Hearing Loss was the most common reason for consultation (40%), followed by unilateral SNHL (23.3%). Aural Atresia was the commonest clinical finding (36.6%). The commonest reason for refusal was social acceptance by the parents due to concern with cosmesis.
CONCLUSION: The main reason of BAHA™ surgery refusal, in otherwise eligible candidates, is related to cosmesis. Patients with congenital anomalies were the most likely candidates to accept BAHA™ implants.
Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BAHA; Candidacy; Cosmetic; Hearing loss

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24377490     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2013.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0165-5876            Impact factor:   1.675


  5 in total

1.  Switching from a percutaneous to a transcutaneous bone anchored hearing system: the utility of the fascia temporalis superficialis pedicled flap in case of skin intolerance.

Authors:  A Devèze; S Rossetto; R Meller; M Sanjuan Puchol
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Bone-anchored hearing aids in conductive and mixed hearing losses: why do patients reject them?

Authors:  Richard T K Siau; Baljeet Dhillon; Derrick Siau; Kevin M J Green
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Comparison of the benefits of cochlear implantation versus contra-lateral routing of signal hearing aids in adult patients with single-sided deafness: study protocol for a prospective within-subject longitudinal trial.

Authors:  Pádraig T Kitterick; Gerard M O'Donoghue; Mark Edmondson-Jones; Andrew Marshall; Ellen Jeffs; Louise Craddock; Alison Riley; Kevin Green; Martin O'Driscoll; Dan Jiang; Terry Nunn; Shakeel Saeed; Wanda Aleksy; Bernhard U Seeber
Journal:  BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord       Date:  2014-08-11

4.  Minimally Invasive Ponto Surgery compared to the linear incision technique without soft tissue reduction for bone conduction hearing implants: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Tim G A Calon; Marc van Hoof; Herbert van den Berge; Arthur J G de Bruijn; Joost van Tongeren; Janny R Hof; Jan Wouter Brunings; Sofia Jonhede; Lucien J C Anteunis; Miranda Janssen; Manuela A Joore; Marcus Holmberg; Martin L Johansson; Robert J Stokroos
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-11-09       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Clinical Outcomes of Soft Tissue Preservation Surgery With Hydroxyapatite-Coated Abutments Compared to Traditional Percutaneous Bone Conduction Hearing Implant Surgery-A Pragmatic Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  M van Hoof; S Wigren; J Ivarsson Blechert; M A Joore; D J M Mateijsen; S J H Bom; J Stalfors; Måns Eeg-Olofsson; O Deguine; A J M van der Rijt; M C Flynn; J Marco Algarra; R J Stokroos
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2020-03-05
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.