OBJECTIVE: Bone conduction (BC) stimulation closer to the cochlea has previously been shown to give higher cochlear promontory acceleration measured by laser Doppler vibrometry (LDV). This study is investigating whether stimulation closer to the cochlea also gives improved hearing sensitivity. Furthermore, the study compares shifts in hearing sensitivity (BC thresholds) and ear-canal sound pressure (ECSP). DESIGN: BC hearing thresholds and ECSP have been measured for stimulation at two positions: the existing bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) position, and a new bone conduction implant (BCI) position that is located closer to the cochlea. STUDY SAMPLE: The measurements were made on 20 normal-hearing subjects. RESULTS: Depending on frequency, the ipsilateral hearing threshold was 3-14 dB better, and the ipsilateral ECSP was 2-12 dB higher for the BCI than for the BAHA position, with no significant differences between threshold and ECSP shifts at group level for most frequencies, and individually only for some subjects. CONCLUSIONS: It was found that both the objective ECSP and the subjective hearing threshold measurements gave similar improvement as previous LDV measurements for stimulation closer to the cochlea. One exception was that the LDV measurements did not show the improved sensitivity for frequencies below 500 Hz found here.
OBJECTIVE: Bone conduction (BC) stimulation closer to the cochlea has previously been shown to give higher cochlear promontory acceleration measured by laser Doppler vibrometry (LDV). This study is investigating whether stimulation closer to the cochlea also gives improved hearing sensitivity. Furthermore, the study compares shifts in hearing sensitivity (BC thresholds) and ear-canal sound pressure (ECSP). DESIGN: BC hearing thresholds and ECSP have been measured for stimulation at two positions: the existing bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) position, and a new bone conduction implant (BCI) position that is located closer to the cochlea. STUDY SAMPLE: The measurements were made on 20 normal-hearing subjects. RESULTS: Depending on frequency, the ipsilateral hearing threshold was 3-14 dB better, and the ipsilateral ECSP was 2-12 dB higher for the BCI than for the BAHA position, with no significant differences between threshold and ECSP shifts at group level for most frequencies, and individually only for some subjects. CONCLUSIONS: It was found that both the objective ECSP and the subjective hearing threshold measurements gave similar improvement as previous LDV measurements for stimulation closer to the cochlea. One exception was that the LDV measurements did not show the improved sensitivity for frequencies below 500 Hz found here.
Authors: Bernhard G Weiss; Mattis Bertlich; Rebecka Scheele; Martin Canis; Mark Jakob; Jan M Sohns; Friedrich Ihler Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-05-20 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: D Beutner; W Delb; H Frenzel; U Hoppe; K B Hüttenbrink; R Mlynski; A Limberger; R Schönweiler; B Schwab; I Todt; M Walger; T Wesarg; T Zahnert; R Zeh Journal: HNO Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 1.284
Authors: D Beutner; W Delb; H Frenzel; U Hoppe; K B Hüttenbrink; R Mlynski; A Limberger; R Schönweiler; B Schwab; I Todt; M Walger; T Wesarg; T Zahnert; R Zeh Journal: HNO Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 1.284
Authors: Friedrich Ihler; Jenny Blum; Max-Ulrich Berger; Bernhard G Weiss; Christian Welz; Martin Canis Journal: Trends Hear Date: 2016-10-03 Impact factor: 3.293