Objective Comparison of Benefits Derived From Contralateral Routing of Signal Hearing Aid and Bone Conduction Device in Noisy Surroundings in Patients With Single-Sided Deafness

[Intervention effects of bone conduction hearing aids in patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss]

The incidence of single-sided deafness（SSD） is increasing year by year. Due to the hearing defects of one ear, the ability of sound localization, speech recognition in noise, and quality of life of patients with single-sided deafness will be affected to varying degrees. This article reviews the intervention effects of different types of bone conduction hearing aids in patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss, and the differences of intervention effects between bone conduction hearing aids, contralateral routing of signal（CROS） aids, and cochlea implant（CI）, to provide a reference for the auditory intervention and clinical treatment of single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss.

Hearing outcomes in children with single sided deafness: Our experience at a tertiary paediatric otorhinolaryngology unit

INTRODUCTION

Hearing rehabilitation options for single sided deafness (SSD) include contralateral routing of sound (CROS) aids and bone conduction devices (BCDs). This study aimed to review the management of children with SSD at our tertiary paediatric otolaryngology unit over the last 15 years.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed. Primary hearing outcomes were measured using the Children's Home Inventory for Listening Difficulties (CHILD) questionnaire score and secondary hearing outcomes were measured using hearing thresholds for speech in noise. Outcomes were measured pre and post bone conduction device (BCD) trial.

RESULTS

49 patients with SSD were identified. 20 children had trial of a BCD. 16 patients had pre- and post- BCD trial CHILD scores available for analysis. There was a statistically significant improvement in CHILD scores and speech in noise testing at +5 dB and +0 dB following amplification with a BCD. The mean use of BCD was 1.3 h per day.

DISCUSSION

We have described the management of children with SSD in our unit. This study demonstrated a statistically significant benefit of BCD use on hearing outcomes. However, device compliance is low suggesting hearing advice choice in the population is complex and further research is warranted.