MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this repeated-measures study, 40 Malaysian adults (aged 19-26 years) with normal hearing bilaterally (based on PTA results) were enrolled. They then underwent the SAL test based on the recommended protocol by Jerger and Tillman (1960). The SAL normative data for each ear were obtained by calculating the differences between air conduction (AC) thresholds in quiet and AC thresholds in noise by means of insert earphone, B71 and B81 bone vibrators.
RESULTS: The SAL normative values were comparable between the ears (p > 0.05), and the data were pooled for subsequent analyses (n = 80 ears). Relative to B81 bone transducer, B71 bone vibrator produced statistically higher SAL normative data at all frequencies (p < 0.05). The SAL normative values established by the present study were statistically lower than those of the previous study (that utilised headphones) at most of frequencies tested (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The SAL normative data produced by the two bone vibrators were significantly different. The SAL normative values were also affected by the type of earphone used. While conducting the SAL test on Malaysian patients, the information provided by this study can be useful to guide the respective clinicians in choosing the appropriate normative data.
METHODS: Six children were recruited and underwent Bonebridge transcutaneous bone conduction implant surgery. The patients' audiometric thresholds for air conduction, bone conduction and sound-field tests were assessed pre-operatively and at six months post-operatively. Patients' satisfaction was assessed at six months post-operatively with the Hearing Device Satisfaction Scale.
RESULTS: No major complications were reported. Mean aided sound-field thresholds improved post-operatively by more than 30 dB for 0.5-4 kHz (p 0.05). All patients were satisfied (scores were over 90 per cent) with the implant in terms of functional outcome and cosmetic appearance.
CONCLUSION: Bonebridge transcutaneous bone conduction implant surgery is safe and effective among children with congenital aural atresia with conductive hearing loss.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, intra-subject repeated measurements of which each subject is his/her own control, from year 2012 to 2016 at two tertiary referral centres.
METHODS: Twenty patients with hearing loss who fulfilled criteria for BB and showed good response to bone conduction hearing aid trial were included. Implantations of BB were carried out under general anaesthesia with preoperative computed tomography (CT) planning. Complications were monitored up to six months postoperatively. Subjects' audiometric thresholds for air conduction, bone conduction and sound field at frequencies of 250Hz to 8kHz were assessed preoperatively and at six months postoperatively. Subjects' satisfaction was evaluated at 6 months post operatively with Hearing Device Satisfaction Scale (HDSS) questionnaire.
RESULTS: There was no major complication reported. Mean aided sound field thresholds showed significant improvement for more than 30dB from 500 to 4000kHz (p<0.05). There was no significant change in mean unaided air conduction and bone conduction thresholds pre and post operatively from 500 to 4000kHz, with a difference of less than 5dB (p>0.05). All the patients were very satisfied (>80%) with the implant, attributing to the promising functional outcome and acceptable cosmetic appearance.
CONCLUSIONS: BB implantation surgery is safe and is effective in restoring hearing deficits among patients aged five and above with conductive or mixed hearing loss and single-sided hearing loss.