Objective: To evaluate the benefit of a bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) contralateral routing of sound (CROS) in 20 patients with unilateral inner ear deafness. Subjects: 21 patients were recruited; 15 had undergone acoustic neuroma surgery and 6 patients had unilateral profound hearing loss due to other causes; 1 patient was excluded. Only patients with thresholds of better than 25 dB HL (500–2000 Hz) and an air-bone gap of less than 10 dB in the best ear were included. Methods: Evaluation involved audiometric measurements before intervention, when fitted with a conventional CROS and after implementation and quantification of the patients’ subjective benefit with a hearing aid-specific instrument: the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). Results: Lateralization scores were not significantly different from chance (50%) in any of the three conditions. Measurements of speech perception in noise showed an increase in the signal to noise ratio (S/N ratio) with the conventional CROS (p = 0.001) and with the BAHA CROS compared to the unaided condition when speech was presented at the front with noise on the poor hearing side. On the other hand, a lower S/N ratio was seen with the BAHA CROS (p = 0.003) compared to the unaided situation when noise was presented at the front with speech on the poor hearing side. The patient outcome measure (APHAB) showed improvement, particularly with the BAHA CROS. Conclusions: The poor sound localization results illustrate the inability of patients with unilateral inner ear deafness to localize sounds. The speech-in-noise measurements reflect the benefit of a BAHA CROS in lifting the head shadow while avoiding some of the disadvantages of a conventional CROS. The benefit of the BAHA CROS was most clearly reflected in the patients’ opinion measured with the APHAB.

Keywords:
Bone-anchored hearing aid, Unilateral inner ear deafness, Acoustic neuroma
1.
Bosman AJ, Hol MKS, Snik AFM, Mylanus EAM, Cremers CWRJ: Bone-anchored hearing aids in unilateral inner ear deafness. Acta Otolaryngol 2003;123:258–260.
2.
Bosman AJ, Snik AFM, van der Pouw CTM, Mylanus EAM, Cremers CWRJ: Audiometric evaluation of bilaterally fitted bone-anchored hearing aids. Audiology 2001;40:158–167.
3.
Brandt A: On Sound Transmission Characteristics of the Human Skull in vivo; thesis Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, 1989.
4.
Cox RM, Alexander GC: The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear 1995;16:176–186.
5.
Cox RM, Gilmore C: Development of the profile of hearing aid performance (PHAP). J Speech Hear Res 1990;33:343–357.
6.
Giolas T: Aural rehabilitation of adults with hearing impairment; in Katz J (ed): Handbook of Clinical Audiology. Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, 1994, pp 776–792.
7.
Gulick WL, Gescheider GA, Frisina RD: Hearing. New York, Oxford University Press, 1989, pp 226, 227, 317–343.
8.
Håkansson B, Tjellström A, Rosenhall U, Carlsson P: The bone-anchored hearing aid. Principal design and a psychoacoustical evaluation. Acta Otolaryngol 1985;100:229–239.
9.
Harford E, Barry J: A rehabilitative approach to the problem of unilateral hearing impairment: Contralateral routing of signals (CROS). J Speech Hear Disord 1965;30:121–138.
10.
Hough JV, Vernon J, Johnson B, Dormer KJ, Himelick T: Experiences with implantable hearing devices and a presentation of a new device. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1986;95:60–65.
11.
Mulder JJ, Cremers CWRJ, Joosten F, Wiersma A, van den Broek P: Fibroinflammatory pseudotumor of the ear. A locally destructive benign lesion. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;121:930–933.
12.
Niparko JK, Cox KM, Lustig LR: Comparison of the bone anchored hearing aid implantable hearing device with contralateral routing of offside signal amplification in the rehabilitation of unilateral deafness. Otol Neurotol 2003;24:73–78.
13.
Plomp R, Mimpen AM: Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiology 1979;18:43–52.
14.
Pulec JL: Restoration of binaural hearing with the Audiant implant following acoustic neuroma surgery. Ear Nose Throat J 1994;73:118–123.
15.
Snik AFM, Mylanus EAM, Cremers CWRJ: The bone-anchored hearing aid in patients with a unilateral air-bone gap. Otol Neurotol 2002;23:61–66.
16.
Stenfelt S, Håkansson BE, Tjellström A: Vibration characteristics of bone conducted sound in vitro. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:422–431.
17.
Tillman TW, Kasten RN, Horner IS: Effect of head shadow on reception of speech. ASHA 1963;5:778–779.
18.
Tjellström A, Lindstrom J, Hallen O, Albrektsson T, Branemark PI: Direct bone anchorage of external hearing aids. J Biomed Eng 1983;5:59–63.
19.
Tjellström A, Lindstrom J, Hallen O, Albrektsson T, Branemark PI: Osseointegrated titanium implants in the temporal bone. A clinical study on bone-anchored hearing aids. Am J Otol 1981;2:304–310.
20.
Valente M: Fitting options for unilateral hearing. Hear J 1995;48:45–48.
21.
Vaneecloo FM, Ruzza I, Hanson JN, Gerard T, Dehaussy J, Cory M, Arrouet C, Vincent C: The monaural pseudo-stereophonic hearing aid (BAHA) in unilateral total deafness: A study of 29 patients. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord) 2001;122:343–350.
© 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
2004
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.