Bone-anchored hearing aids and unilateral sensorineural hearing loss: why do patients reject them?

This study aimed to report the bone-anchored hearing aid uptake and the reasons for their rejection by unilateral sensorineural deafness patients. A retrospective review of 90 consecutive unilateral sensorineural deafness patients referred to the Greater Manchester Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Programm...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of laryngology and otology 2015-04, Vol.129 (4), p.321-325
Main Authors: Siau, D, Dhillon, B, Andrews, R, Green, K M J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anesthesia
Audiology
Bone Conduction
Correction of Hearing Impairment - methods
Correction of Hearing Impairment - psychology
Ears & hearing
Etiology
Female
Hearing aids
Hearing Aids - psychology
Hearing loss
Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - psychology
Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - rehabilitation
Hearing Loss, Unilateral - psychology
Hearing Loss, Unilateral - rehabilitation
Humans
Main Articles
Male
Middle Aged
Patient Preference
Patients
Prosthesis Implantation - methods
Prosthesis Implantation - psychology
Retrospective Studies
Surgery
Titanium
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study aimed to report the bone-anchored hearing aid uptake and the reasons for their rejection by unilateral sensorineural deafness patients. A retrospective review of 90 consecutive unilateral sensorineural deafness patients referred to the Greater Manchester Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Programme between September 2008 and August 2011 was performed. In all, 79 (87.8 per cent) were deemed audiologically suitable: 24 (30.3 per cent) eventually had a bone-anchored hearing aid implanted and 55 (69.6 per cent) patients declined. Of those who declined, 26 (47.3 per cent) cited perceived limited benefits, 18 (32.7 per cent) cited reservations regarding surgery, 13 (23.6 per cent) preferred a wireless contralateral routing of sound device and 12 (21.8 per cent) cited cosmetic reasons. In all, 32 (40.5 per cent) suitable patients eventually chose the wireless contralateral routing of sound device. The uptake rate was 30 per cent for audiologically suitable patients. Almost half of suitable patients did not perceive a sufficient benefit to proceed to device implantation and a significant proportion rejected it. It is therefore important that clinicians do not to rush to implant all unilateral sensorineural hearing loss patients with a bone-anchored hearing aid.
ISSN:0022-2151
1748-5460
DOI:10.1017/S0022215115000602