Bone conduction devices (BCD) have proven to be effective options for hearing amplification in patients who are not candidates for conventional hearing aids. This study prospectively surveyed 70 patients with BCD using the COSI (Client Oriented Scale of Improvement) and GHAP (Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile) questionnaires. Transcutaneous BCD (tBCD) were implanted in 37 patients and percutaneous BCD (pBCD) in 33 patients. All parameters of the COSI questionnaire showed significant improvement after fitting of all the BCDs. There was no difference in the FF speech and GHABP parameters for pBCD vs. tBCD. The only difference was in postoperative skin complications, with 86.5% of tBCD patients having normal skin vs. 45.5% patients with pBCDs. The results of this study confirm that bone conduction devices are effective solutions for hearing rehabilitation in suitable candidates and tBCD are associated with fewer skin-related postoperative complications.
Transcutaneous vs. percutaneous bone conduction devices
Reviewed by Gauri Mankekar
CONTRIBUTOR
Gauri Mankekar
Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Louisiana State University Shreveport, Louisiana, USA.
View Full Profile
