Abstract
Objective: Compare the audiological and quality of life assessment in 2 groups of patients: users of BAHA and users of TransEar devices.
Method: Retrospective study of 20 patients with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Group number 1, 10 patients using TransEar. Group number 2, 10 patients using BAHA. Prefitting Pure Tone Average (PTA) 0.25 to 4kHz compared with postfitting PTA 0.25- 3kHz between groups. Survey results of the Hearing Device Satisfaction Scale tool.
Results: Functional hearing gain was observed in both groups. The BAHA system showed higher hearing benefit than the TransEar system. When mean thresholds of each system were compared, mean functional response was 41dBSPL with the TransEar and 25dBSPL with the BAHA. The satisfaction level of sound category was slightly better for the BAHA device. TransEar is preferred over BAHA in fitting, cosmesis, and management issues. BAHA showed better scores for quality of life aspects.
Conclusion: In this group of patients, higher hearing benefit of osseointegrated implant regarding the effectiveness over the intracanal system was observed. When satisfaction level is analyzed related to fitting, management, and quality of life, an intracanal device is preferred.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.