Comparative Effectiveness of Personal Sound Amplification Products Versus Hearing Aids for Unilateral Hearing Loss: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Trial.

BACKGROUND: This study compared hearing outcomes with use of personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) and hearing aids (HAs) in patients with moderate to moderately severe unilateral hearing loss. METHODS: Thirty-nine participants were prospectively enrolled, and randomly assigned to use either one HA (basic or premium type) or one PSAP (basic or high-end type) for the first 8 weeks and then the other device for the following 8 weeks. Participants underwent a battery of examinations at three visits, including sound-field audiometry, word recognition score (WRS), speech perception in quiet and in noise, real-ear measurement, and self-report questionnaires. RESULTS: Functional gain was significantly higher with HAs across all frequencies (P < 0.001). While both PSAPs and HAs improved WRS from the unaided condition, HAs were superior to PSAPs. The speech recognition threshold in quiet conditions and signal-to-noise ratio in noisy conditions were significantly lower in the HA-aided condition than in the PSAP-aided condition, and in the PSAP-aided condition than in the unaided condition. Subjective satisfaction also favored HAs than PSAPs in questionnaires, Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids, and Host Institutional Questionnaire. CONCLUSION: While PSAPs provide some benefit for moderate to moderately severe unilateral hearing loss, HAs are more effective. This underscores the potential role of PSAPs as an accessible, affordable first-line intervention in hearing rehabilitation, particularly for individuals facing challenges in accessing conventional HAs.

The Latency of Auditory Event-Related Potential P300 Prolonged in School-Age Students with Unilateral Hearing Loss in a Mandarin Learning Environment.

Our study investigated the differences in speech performance and neurophysiological response in groups of school-age children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL) who were otherwise typically developing (TD). We recruited a total of 16 primary school-age children for our study (UHL = 9/TD = 7), who were screened by doctors at Shin Kong Wu-Ho-Su Memorial Hospital. We used the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R) to test word comprehension, and the PPVT-R percentile rank (PR) value was proportional to the auditory memory score (by The Children's Oral Comprehension Test) in both groups. Later, we assessed the latency and amplitude of auditory ERP P300 and found that the latency of auditory ERP P300 in the UHL group was prolonged compared with that in the TD group. Although students with UHL have typical hearing in one ear, based on our results, long-term UHL might be the cause of atypical organization of brain areas responsible for auditory processing or even visual perceptions attributed to speech delay and learning difficulties.

A Randomized Crossover Study in Single-Sided Deafness Comparing a Cartilage Conduction CROS System and an Air-Conduction CROS System.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if cartilage conduction (CC) rerouting devices are noninferior to air-conduction (AC) rerouting devices for single-sided deafness (SSD) patients by measuring objective and subjective performance using speech-in-noise tests that resemble a realistic hearing environment, sound localization tests, and standardized questionnaires. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-subject randomized, crossover study. SETTING: Anechoic room inside a university. PATIENTS: Nine adults between 21 and 58 years of age with severe or profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. INTERVENTIONS: Patients' baseline hearing was assessed; they then used both the cartilage conduction contralateral routing of signals device (CC-CROS) and an air-conduction CROS hearing aid (AC-CROS). Patients wore each device for 2 weeks in a randomly assigned order. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Three main outcome measures were 1) speech-in-noise tests, measuring speech reception thresholds; 2) proportion of correct sound localization responses; and 3) scores on the questionnaires, "Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit" (APHAB) and "Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale" with 12 questions (SSQ-12). RESULTS: Speech reception threshold improved significantly when noise was ambient, and speech was presented from the front or the poor-ear side with both CC-CROS and AC-CROS. When speech was delivered from the better-ear side, AC-CROS significantly improved performance, whereas CC-CROS had no significant effect. Both devices mainly worsened sound localization, whereas the APHAB and SSQ-12 scores showed benefits. CONCLUSION: CC-CROS has noninferior hearing-in-noise performance except when the speech was presented to the better ear under ambient noise. Subjective measures showed that the patients realized the effectiveness of both devices.

Auditory Outcomes Following Cochlear Implantation in Children with Unilateral Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVE: Unilateral hearing loss (UHL) in children is associated with speech and language delays. Cochlear implantation (CI) is currently the only rehabilitative option that restores binaural hearing. This study aims to describe auditory outcomes in children who underwent CI for UHL and to determine the association between duration of hearing loss and auditory outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Three tertiary-level, academic institutions. PATIENTS: Children <18 years with UHL who underwent CI between 2018 and 2021. INTERVENTION: Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Speech perception and Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) were assessed postimplantation. Scores >50% on speech perception and SSQ scores >8 points were considered satisfactory. Associations between duration of UHL and implantation age and outcomes were assessed using Spearman's rank correlation. RESULTS: Of the 38 children included, mean age at CI was 7.9 ± 3.2 years and mean UHL duration was 5.0 ± 2.8 years. Mean datalogging was 8.1 ± 3.1 hours/day. Mean auditory testing scores were SSQ, 7.9 ± 1.2; BABY BIO, 68.1 ± 30.2%; CNC, 38.4 ± 28.4%; WIPI, 52.5 ± 23.1%. Scores >50% on CNC testing were achieved by 40% of patients. SSQ scores >8 points were reported by 78% (7/9) of patients. There were no significant correlations between UHL duration and auditory outcomes. CONCLUSION: Overall, children with UHL who undergo CI can achieve satisfactory speech perception scores and SSQ scores. There were no associations between duration of hearing loss and age at implantation with auditory outcomes. Multiple variables may impact auditory outcomes, including motivation, family support, access to technology, and consistent isolated auditory training postactivation and should be taken into consideration in addition to age at implantation and duration of UHL in determination of CI candidacy.

Active TriCROS: A Simultaneous Stimulation With a (Bi)CROS System and a Hearing Aid in the Worst Ear for Severely Asymmetrical Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVE: Severely asymmetrical hearing loss (SAHL) is characterized by a moderately severe or severe hearing loss in one side and normal or mildly impaired controlateral hearing in the other. The Active tri-CROS combines the Contralateral Routing-of-Signal System (CROS, or BiCROS if the best ear is stimulated) and the stimulation of the worst ear by an in-the-canal hearing aid. This study aims to evaluate the benefit of the Active tri-CROS for SAHL patients. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective study was conducted from September 2019 to December 2020. SETTING: Ambulatory, tertiary care. PATIENTS: Patients were retrospectively included if they had received the Active tri-CROS system after having used a CROS or BiCROS system for SAHL for at least 3 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Audiometric gain, signal-to-noise ratio, spatial localization, and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit and Tinnitus Handicap Inventory questionnaires were performed before equipment and after a month with the system. RESULTS: Twenty patients (mean, 62 yr old) with a mean of 74.3 ± 8.7 dB HL on the worst ear were included. The mean tonal hearing gain on the worst ear was 20 ± 6 dB. Signal-to-noise ratio significantly rose from 1.43 ± 3.9 to 0.16 ± 3.4 dB ( p = 0.0001). Spatial localization was not significantly improved. The mean Tinnitus Handicap Inventory test score of the eight patients suffering from tinnitus rose from 45.5 ± 18.5 to 31 ± 25.2 ( p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: The Active tri-CROS system is a promising new therapeutically solution for SAHL.

Long-Term Cochlear Implant Sound Processor Usage in Children with Single-Sided Deafness.

OBJECTIVE: To assess cochlear implant (CI) sound processor usage over time in children with single-sided deafness (SSD) and identify factors influencing device use. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, chart review study. SETTING: Pediatric tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Children with SSD who received CI between 2014 and 2020. OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcome was average daily CI sound processor usage over follow-up. RESULTS: Fifteen children with SSD who underwent CI surgery were categorized based on age of diagnosis and surgery timing. Over an average of 4.3-year follow-up, patients averaged 4.6 hours/day of CI usage. Declining usage trends were noted over time, with the first 2 years postactivation showing higher rates. No significant usage differences emerged based on age, surgery timing, or hearing loss etiology. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term usage decline necessitates further research into barriers and enablers for continued CI use in pediatric SSD cases.

Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in Pediatric Unilateral Hearing Loss: Impact of Device Use and Direct Input.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of daily cochlear implant (CI) use on speech perception outcomes among children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL). STUDY DESIGN: Multi-institutional retrospective case series of pediatric patients with UHL who underwent CI between 2018 to 2022. SETTING: Three tertiary children's hospitals. METHODS: Demographics were obtained including duration of deafness and age at CI. Best consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) word scores and data logs describing hours of CI usage were assessed postimplantation. Use of direct audio input (DAI) during rehabilitation was recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-seven children were included, with a mean age at CI of 7.8 years. Mean datalogging time was 7.8 ± 3.0 hours/day. 40.7% of children utilized daily DAI. The mean CNC score using the best score during the study period was 34.9%. There was no significant correlation between hours of CI usage and CNC score. There was a significant improvement in CNC score associated with whether the child used DAI during rehabilitation (CNC 50.91% [yes] vs 23.81% [no]), which remained significant when adjusting for age at CI, duration of deafness, and data log hours. CONCLUSION: Unlike children with bilateral hearing loss and CI, children with UHL and CI demonstrate no significant correlation between hours of daily CI usage and CNC scores. However, children who used DAI during postoperative rehabilitation achieved significantly higher CNC scores than those who did not. This suggests that rehabilitation focused on isolated listening with the implanted ear maybe critical in optimizing outcomes with CI in UHL patients.

Early cochlear implantation for children with single sided deafness.

OBJECTIVES: Single-sided deafness (SSD) can have consequences for a child's language, educational, and social development. A cochlear implant (CI) is the only device which can restore true binaural hearing, yet they are only approved for children with (SSD) over the age of five in the United States. Reports on speech perception outcomes for children implanted at a younger age are limited. The present study aims to examine the effects of age at implantation, duration of deafness, hearing loss etiology, and presence of additional disabilities on device usage and speech perception outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was used to examine demographics and speech perception outcomes for 18 children implanted at age five or younger. RESULTS: Speech perception results were highly variable, with some children deriving significant benefit and others demonstrating no sound awareness through the implant alone. Age at implantation and duration of deafness did not have a clear impact on outcomes. Device usage was low in many children, often those with anatomical abnormalities such as a hypoplastic cochlear nerve. There are challenges to assessing speech perception in young children with SSD, leading to a lack of standardized outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Early CI for children with SSD may improve speech perception, but benefit is not guaranteed. Candidacy evaluation should consider both medical and audiological factors, in addition to the degree of family support and realistic expectations. Caution is especially warranted in children with significant anatomical anomalies.

Factors Predictive of Binaural Hearing Restoration by Cochlear Implant in Single-Sided Deafness.

INTRODUCTION: Cochlear implants (CIs) can restore binaural hearing in cases of single-sided deafness (SSD). However, studies with a high level of evidence in support of this phenomenon are lacking. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of CIs using several spatialized speech-in-noise tests and to identify potential predictors of successful surgery. METHODS: Ten cases underwent standard CI surgery (MEDEL-Flex24). The speech-in-noise test was used in three different spatial configurations. The noise was presented from the front (N0), toward the CI (NCI), and toward the ear (Near), while the speech was always from the front (S0). For each test, the speech-to-noise ratio at 50% intelligibility (SNR50) was evaluated. Seven different effects were assessed (summation, head shadow [HS], speech released of masking [SRM], and squelch for the CI and for the ear). RESULTS: A significant summation effect of 1.5 dB was observed. Contralateral PTA was positively correlated with S0N0-B and S0NCI-B (CIon and unplugged ear). S0N0-B results were positively correlated with S0N0-CIoff (p < 0.0001) and with S0Near-CIoff results (p = 0.004). A significant positive correlation was found between delay post-activation and HS gain for the CI (p = 0.005). Finally, the HS was negatively correlated with the squelch effect for the ear. CONCLUSION: CI benefits patients with SSD in noise and can improve the threshold for detecting low-level noise. Contralateral PTA could predict good postoperative results. Simple tests performed preoperatively can predict the likelihood of surgical success in reversing SSD.

Long-Term Perceived Benefit of Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users with Unilateral Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the perceived benefit of cochlear implant (CI) use for children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL) and evaluate whether perceived abilities are associated with performance on measures of speech recognition and spatial hearing. METHOD: Nineteen children with moderate-to-profound UHL underwent cochlear implantation. The Speech Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Questionnaire modified for children (SSQ-C) were completed by parental proxy pre-operatively and at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months post-activation. Linear mixed models evaluated perceived benefits over the study period. Pearson correlations assessed the association between subjective report and performance on measures of word recognition with the CI alone and spatial hearing (speech recognition in spatially-separated noise and sound source localization) in the combined condition (CI plus contralateral ear). RESULTS: For the SSQ-C, parents reported significant improvements with CI use as compared to pre-operative perceptions (p < 0.001); improved perceptions were either maintained or continued to improve over the 2-year post-activation period. Perceived benefit did not significantly correlate with word recognition with the CI alone or spatial hearing outcomes in the combined condition. CONCLUSION: Families of children with UHL observed benefits of CI use early after cochlear implantation that was maintained with long-term device use. Responses to subjective measures may broaden our understanding of the experiences of pediatric CI users with UHL in addition to outcomes on typical measures of CI performance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 134:919-925, 2024.

Use of Socioeconomic Demographic Data in Studies on Pediatric Unilateral Hearing Loss: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: Social determinants of health (SDOH) (healthcare access and quality, education access and quality, socioeconomic status, social and cultural context, neighborhood and built environment) ( Healthy People 2030 ) have been shown to impact a wide range of health-related outcomes and access to care. Given the medical and nonmedical costs associated with children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL), the varied insurance coverage for hearing healthcare services, and the differences in hearing aid utilization rates between children of different sociodemographic classes, the sociodemographic information of children with UHL enrolled in research studies should be collected to ensure the generalizability of hearing healthcare interventions. Therefore, the objective of this scoping review is to assess the reporting of SDOH data for participants in studies of pediatric UHL and its comparison to population trends. DESIGN: Two searches of published literature were conducted by a qualified medical librarian. Two reviewers then evaluated all candidate articles. Study inclusion parameters were from 2010 to present, peer-reviewed studies with prospective study design, and participant population including children (age 0 to 18 years old) with UHL. RESULTS: Two literature searches using PubMed Medline and Embase found 442 and 3058 studies each for review. After abstract and paper review, 87 studies were included in final qualitative review, with 22 of these studies reporting race distribution of participants, 15 reporting insurance status or family income, and 12 reporting the maternal education level. CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic data are not commonly reported in research studies of children with UHL. In reported samples, research participants are more likely to have private insurance and higher family income compared with overall population distribution. These demographic biases may affect the generalizability of study results to all children with UHL. Further evaluation is warranted to evaluate whether participant recruitment affects outcomes that reflect the overall population.

Long-Term Outcome of Cochlear Implantation in Children With Congenital, Perilingual, and Postlingual Single-Sided Deafness.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the long-term outcomes of children with single-sided deafness (SSD) after cochlear implant (CI) surgery, during and after rehabilitation, and compared the results of children with congenital, perilingual, and postlingual SSD. We evaluated the impact of SSD at age at onset and duration of deafness on their performance. DESIGN: Thirty-six children with SSD treated with CI participated in the study: 20 had congenital, seven perilingual (defined: >0 to 4 years), and nine had postlingual deafness (defined as >4 years of age). Their outcome with CI were measured on both subjective and objective scales: duration of device use, speech intelligibility in noise and in quiet, bilateral hearing and localization ability, quality of life and hearing, presence and loudness of tinnitus, and hearing ability of the better hearing ear. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up time of 4.75 years, 32 of the 36 children used their CI on a regular basis. The remaining four children were nonusers. These children had congenital SSD and were older than three years at the time of CI surgery. Overall, for congenital/perilingual and postlingual SSD, speech intelligibility in noise and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) speech subscore were significantly improved, as were their subjective and objective localization ability and hearing-related quality of life. Children with postlingual SSD benefited from the CI with regard to speech intelligibility, SSQ speech/spatial/total score, and localization error, and children with congenital SSD showed better results with a short duration of deafness of less than 3 years compared with those with a longer deafness period. CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implantation is a successful treatment for children with congenital/perilingual or postlingual SSD. Results largely differed with respect to the onset and duration of deafness, and better outcomes were achieved by children with postlingual SSD and with a short duration of deafness. Our data also confirmed that children with congenital SSD should be implanted with a CI within three years of age.

Benefits of unilateral cochlear implantation in adults with asymmetric hearing loss: Audiologic and patient-related outcome measures.

PURPOSE: To investigate the benefits of cochlear implantation in adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective within-subjects repeated-measures. SETTING: Two tertiary cochlear implant centers. PATIENTS: Fourteen adults with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in the worse hearing ear and up to moderate SNHL in the better hearing ear. INTERVENTION: Cochlear implantation in the worse hearing ear. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) test, AzBio sentence test in noise, and lateralization testing were conducted preoperatively and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-activation. Patient-related outcomes were measured using the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale and Glasgow Benefit Inventory. Tinnitus Handicap Inventory was administered to subjects with tinnitus. RESULTS: Mean length of hearing loss in the worse hearing ear was 3.5 years. The mean CNC change scores from baseline were 54.8, 55.9, and 58.9 percentage points at 3-, 6-, and 12-months (p < 0.001). AzBio sentence test in noise demonstrated improved scores in all spatial configurations, although statistically significant in S0N0 (speech front, noise front) only. Lateralization testing showed significant improvement of 22.9, 24.5, and 24.0 percentage points at 3-, 6-, and 12 months post-activation (p = 0.002). All patient-related outcome measures revealed significant improvement. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates improved speech perception in noise, sound lateralization, quality of life, and reduction in tinnitus perception in adults with SSD/AHL who undergo cochlear implantation. Our results add to the growing body of evidence that cochlear implant should be offered to this population.

The Relationship Between Auditory Performances and Satisfaction of Unilateral Bone-Anchored Hearing in Conductive and Mixed Hearing Loss.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the deviced and non-deviced auditory performance results of patients with unilateral bone-anchored hearing aid. METHODS: Deviced and non-deviced free field hearing thresholds, speech discrimination, and sentence discrimination scores were evaluated. Shortened profile of the benefit from the hearing instrument (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) was used. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients participated in the study. The mean age was 37.9 ± 17.1 years. There was a statistically significant difference between the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit satisfaction questionnaire and total scores, Background Noise (BN), Reverberation (RV) subscales according to device status (P -lt; .05). No significant difference was found between the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit total score result of the group divided by the hearing aid threshold (P -gt; .05). No significant difference was found between the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit total score result of the group divided by the threshold without a hearing aid (P -gt; .05). CONCLUSION: Bone-implanted hearing aids are effective and reliable amplification methods in patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss. Positive results of patient satisfaction and evaluation inventories were obtained from this study.

[Cochlear implant and tinnitus]. / Cochleaimplantat und Tinnitus.

Cochlear implant (CI) treatment is now established as a successful standard of care for auditory rehabilitation of profoundly deaf or severe hearing loss patients. CI candidates with tinnitus also benefit from improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and tinnitus burden. Current CI indications include bilateral (double-sided) profound hearing loss and deafness (DSD), unilateral (single-sided) deafness (SSD), and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). The new and expanded indications for cochlear implants result in different healthcare situations, which may also be associated with differences in tinnitus burden before and after CI treatment. In this article, we discuss the prevalence of tinnitus in different patient groups and the influence of CI on tinnitus prevalence and severity in these groups. In addition, further therapeutic options for tinnitus suppression based on the CI principle are presented, including the development of an anti-tinnitus implant (proof of concept).

Postoperative optimization of cochlear implantation for single sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Identify and evaluate the effectiveness of methods for improving postoperative cochlear implant (CI) hearing performance in subjects with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). DATA SOURCES: Embase, PubMed, Scopus. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. English language studies of adult CI recipients with SSD and AHL reporting a postoperative intervention and comparative audiometric data pertaining to speech in noise, speech in quiet and sound localization were included. RESULTS: 32 studies met criteria for full text review and 6 (n = 81) met final inclusion criteria. Interventions were categorized as: formal auditory training, programming techniques, or hardware optimization. Formal auditory training (n = 10) found no objective improvement in hearing outcomes. Experimental CI maps did not improve audiologic outcomes (n = 9). Programed CI signal delays to improve synchronization demonstrated improved sound localization (n = 12). Hardware optimization, including multidirectional (n = 29) and remote (n = 11) microphones, improved sound localization and speech in noise, respectively. CONCLUSION: Few studies meeting inclusion criteria and small sample sizes highlight the need for further study. Formal auditory training did not appear to improve hearing outcomes. Programming techniques, such as CI signal delay, and hardware optimization, such as multidirectional and remote microphones, show promise to improve outcomes for SSD and AHL CI users.

[Prospective comparative analysis of cochlear implant patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss with regard to health-related quality of life, tinnitus distress and psychological comorbidities]. / Prospektive Vergleichsanalyse von CI-Patienten mit einseitiger Taubheit und asymmetrischem Hörverlust hinsichtlich der gesundheitsbezogenen Lebensqualität, Tinnitusbelastung und psychischen Komorbiditäten.

BACKGROUND: Patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) are increasingly being treated with cochlear implants (CI) due to the demonstrated improvements in auditory abilities and quality of life. To date, there are few published studies in which these two groups are comparatively studied. The aim of the current study was to examine which factors differ between those two patient groups, especially preoperatively. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the previously published raw data of 66 prospectively recruited CI patients (21 SSD/45 AHL) was performed. In addition to the hearing outcome, tinnitus distress (tinnitus questionnaire), health-related quality of life (Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, NCIQ), stress (Perceived Stress Questionnaire, PSQ), and psychological comorbidities (General Depression Scale, ADS­L and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, GAD-7) were assessed in SSD and AHL patients pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS: Preoperatively, SSD patients showed significantly higher scores in the NCIQ subdomains "elementary" and "advanced sound perception" than the AHL group. Stress (PSQ) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-7) were significantly higher preoperatively in SSD patients than in AHL patients. After CI, these differences were strongly reduced, with minimal differences being detectable between the groups in the investigated domains postoperatively. CONCLUSION: SSD and AHL patients differ significantly preoperatively in terms of their subjective hearing assessment and psychosocial parameters. In SSD patients, psychological stress factors may have a stronger impact on the quality of life than in AHL patients. These aspects should be taken into account in the preoperative counseling and postoperative rehabilitation.

Two-Year Outcomes of Cochlear Implant Use for Children With Unilateral Hearing Loss: Benefits and Comparison to Children With Normal Hearing.

OBJECTIVES: Children with severe-to-profound unilateral hearing loss, including cases of single-sided deafness (SSD), lack access to binaural cues that support spatial hearing, such as recognizing speech in complex multisource environments and sound source localization. Listening in a monaural condition negatively impacts communication, learning, and quality of life for children with SSD. Cochlear implant (CI) use may restore binaural hearing abilities and improve outcomes as compared to alternative treatments or no treatment. This study investigated performance over 24 months of CI use in young children with SSD as compared to the better hearing ear alone and to children with bilateral normal hearing (NH). DESIGN: Eighteen children with SSD who received a CI between the ages of 3.5 and 6.5 years as part of a prospective clinical trial completed assessments of word recognition in quiet, masked sentence recognition, and sound source localization at regular intervals out to 24-month postactivation. Eighteen peers with bilateral NH, matched by age at the group level, completed the same test battery. Performance at 24-month postactivation for the SSD group was compared to the performance of the NH group. RESULTS: Children with SSD have significantly poorer speech recognition in quiet, masked sentence recognition, and localization both with and without the use of the CI than their peers with NH. The SSD group experienced significant benefits with the CI+NH versus the NH ear alone on measures of isolated word recognition, masked sentence recognition, and localization. These benefits were realized within the first 3 months of use and were maintained through the 24-month postactivation interval. CONCLUSIONS: Young children with SSD who use a CI experience significant isolated word recognition and bilateral spatial hearing benefits, although their performance remains poorer than their peers with NH.

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.

Influence of listening environment on usage patterns in cochlear implant patients with single-sided deafness.

OBJECTIVE: To compare cochlear implant (CI) data logging of patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) and bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (biSNHL) in various acoustic environments and study the implications of data logging on auditory performance. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case control study. METHODS: Adult CI patients with SSD or biSNHL from 2010 to 2021 with usage data collected at 3-, 6-, and 12-months following device activation were identified. The CI listening environment was defined as speech in noise, speech in quiet, quiet, music or noise. Auditory performance was measured using the CNC word, AzBio sentence tests and the Tinnitus Handicap Index (THI). RESULTS: 60 adults with SSD or biSNHL were included. CI patients with biSNHL wore their devices more than those with SSD at 3-months post-activation (11.18 versus 8.97 hours/day, p = 0.04), though there were no significant differences at 6-12 months. Device usage was highest in the speech in quiet environment. In SSD CI users, there was a positive correlation (p = 0.03) between device use and CNC scores at 12-months and an improvement in THI scores at 12-months (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: CI users with SSD and biSNHL have comparable duration of device usage at longer follow-up periods with greatest device usage recorded in speech in quiet environments.