Development and Validation of the Spanish AzBio Sentence Corpus.

OBJECTIVE: To create and validate a Spanish sentence test for evaluation of speech understanding of Spanish-speaking listeners with hearing loss or cochlear implants (CI). STUDY DESIGN: Two thousand sentences were recorded from two male and two female speakers. The average intelligibility of each sentence was estimated as the mean score achieved by five listeners presented with a five-channel cochlear implant simulation. The mean scores of each sentence were used to construct 42 lists of 20 sentences with similar mean scores. List equivalency was then validated by presenting all lists to 10 CI users and in a 2-list comparison in a clinical setting to 38 CI patients. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Normal-hearing listeners (n = 5), CI users in a research study (n = 10), and CI patients (n = 38) in routine clinical follow-up. INTERVENTION: Multiple sentence lists from a newly minted speech perception test. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: List intelligibility and equivalence across sentence lists. RESULTS: Forty-two lists of sentences were equivalent when all lists were presented in random order to 10 adult CI recipients. The variability of scores observed on lists presented to the same listener in the same condition was captured using a binomial distribution model based on a 40-item list for 38 adult implant recipients. CONCLUSION: The Spanish AzBio Sentence Test includes 42 lists of 20 sentences. These sentences are roughly equivalent in terms of overall difficulty and confidence limits have been provided to assess the significance of variability in list scores observed within or across conditions. These materials will be of benefit when assessing native Spanish speakers in both research and clinical settings.

Implantes auditivos de conducción ósea percutáneo, transcutáneo: comparación / Percutaneous, Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Hearing Implants: comparison

Introducción: Los implantes de conducción ósea son alternativas en rehabilitación para pacientes con sordera conductiva/mixta o unilateral. Objetivo: Analizar desenlaces audiológicos, calidad de vida y percepción subjetiva de beneficios en pacientes con sordera conductiva y/o mixta o unilateral, usuarios del sistema transcutáneo Bonebridge®, o del sistema percutáneo BAHA®. Método: Estudio prospectivo en diez pacientes usuarios del sistema transcutáneo, y comparación con diez usuarios del sistema percutáneo. Evaluación audiológica, percepción de calidad de vida y satisfacción. Resultados: Con el sistema transcutáneo en sordera conductiva/mixta se registró ganancia promedio de 39 dB SPL (desviación estándar [DE] ±4; intervalo de confianza [IC] 95% 35-43), y con el sistema percutáneo, 33 dB SPL (DE ±7; IC 95% 26-40); diferencia de 6 dB SPL (EE ±3; IC 95% -1-13, p = 0,09). Discriminación de lenguaje con sistema transcutáneo 100% a 63 dB (DE ±2 dB; IC 95% 61-65) y con sistema percutáneo 100% a 58 dB (DE ±7 dB; IC 95% 51-65), diferencia de 5 dB (EE ±3 dB; IC 95% -2-12, p = 0,12). En sordera unilateral, la comparación de umbrales promedio con los dispositivos: 37 dB SPL (DE ±4; IC 95% 31-43) para el sistema transcutáneo y 32 dB SPL (DE ±3, IC 95% 27-37) para el sistema percutáneo, diferencia de 5 dB SPL (EE ±3; IC 95% -1-11, p = 0,09). Discriminación de lenguaje para sistema transcutáneo 100% a 66 dB SPL (DE ±7; IC 95% 55-77) y con sistema percutáneo 100% a 64 dB SPL (DE ±5; IC 95% 56-72), diferencia de 2 dB SPL (EE ±4; IC 95% –9-13, p = 0,7). Promedio total para percepción de beneficios con el uso de los dispositivos: 33 (DE ±18; IC 95% 20-46) para el sistema transcutáneo y 22 (DE ±12; IC 95% 13-31) en sistema percutáneo, diferencia de 11 puntos (EE ±7; IC 95% –3-25, p = 0,12). El nivel de satisfacción fue cuantificado de manera semejante, excepto en: Aspectos generales, sub-ítem Comodidad a favor del sistema transcutáneo. Conclusiones: Los beneficios audiológicos, satisfacción y calidad de vida identificados en los pacientes con el sistema Bonebridge son evidentes y comparables a los que han logrado los pacientes con el sistema BAHA...

Introduction: Hearing bone conduction implants are alternatives available for hearing rehabilitation in patients with conductive mixed hearing loss or unilateral deafness. Objective: To analyze audiological outcomes, quality of life and subjective hearing benefits perception in patients with conductive mixed hearing loss or unilateral deafness, users of percutaneous BAHA® system, or transcutaneous active bone conduction system Bonebridge®. Materials and Methods: Prospective study on 10 patients with transcutaneous system compared with 10 users of percutaneous system. Audiometries, speech recognition with and without the system, Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and Hearing Device Satisfaction Scale (HDSS) surveys tools. Results: With transcutaneous system, conductive mixed hearing loss group, achieved postoperatory mean gain of 33 dB SPL (Standard error [SE] ±3, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 26-40, p>0.00001); with percutaneous system 38 dB SPL (SE ±6) 5% CI 25-51, p>0.00001); difference 5 dB SPL (SE ±3, 95% CI 1-11, p = 0.09). Postoperative speech discrimination, transcutaneous system 100% @63 dB (Standard deviation [SD] ±2 dB, 95% CI 61-65); percutaneous system 100% @58 dB (SD ±7 dB, 95% CI 51-65); difference 5 dB (SE ±3 dB, 95% CI -2 – 12, p = 0.12). In Single Sided Deafness (SSD), postoperative, transcutaneous system 82 dB SPL (SE ±4, 95% CI 72-92); percutaneous system 92 dB SPL (SE ±7, 95% CI 76-108); difference of 10 dB SPL (SE ±4, 95% CI 0.1-20, p = 0.047). Speech discrimination, postoperative, transcutaneous system 100% @66 dB SPL (SD ±7, 95% CI 55-77), percutaneous system 100% @64 dB (SD ±5, 95% CI 56-72); difference 2 dB (SE ±4, 95% CI -9-13, p = 0.7). For benefit perception with the devices, for transcutaneous system mean total scored 33 (SD ±18, 95% CI 20-46); for percutaneous system, 22 (SD ±12, 95% CI 13-31); difference 11 points (EE ±7, 95% CI -3-25, p = 0.12). Satisfaction with the device survey scored similarly except for the Comfort sub-item in the General Aspects favorable to the transcutaneous system. Conclusions: Audiological, satisfaction and –quality of life benefits identified in patients with Bonebridge® system are evident and comparable to those achieved by patients with the BAHA® system...

Estudio comparativo en pacientes usuarios de implantes Vibrant Soundbridge® (VSB) y sistema osteointegrado BAHA® / Comparative study on patients users of Vibrant Soundbridge® and osseointegrated BAHA® implants

Objetivo: presentar la experiencia de una institución en la rehabilitación de pacientes con pérdida auditiva utilizando el implante de oído medio Vibrant Soundbridge® (VSB). Diseño: estudio retrospectivo. Materiales y métodos: se revisaron registros médicos, quirúrgicos y audiológicos de pacientes a los que se les implantó el sistema Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB), evaluando la ganancia auditiva establecida por la diferencia en los promedios de las frecuencias 0.5 a 3 kHz en la audiometría tonal postimplante con el sistema y sin él. Se evaluó también la satisfacción de uso con el dispositivo mediante la encuesta Escala de Satisfacción de Audición con Dispositivo (HDSS, Hearing Device Satisfaction Scale). Realizamos comparación de desenlaces audiológicos con una población de usuarios de similares características del sistema osteointegrado BAHA®. Resultados: 25 pacientes con pérdida auditiva predominantemente mixta recibieron un implante VSB colocando el Transductor de Masa Flotante (FMT) en ventana redonda en 23 casos (92%). La ganancia auditiva promedio fue de 36 ± 16 decibeles (dB). No se identificaron diferencias significativas en la ganancia auditiva entre los procesadores AP404-36 dB y Amadé-38 dB, p = 0.6. La ganancia auditiva en el grupo de usuarios del sistema BAHA fue de 37 dB y la discriminación de lenguaje a 65 dB fue de 93% y 100% para VSB y BAHA® respectivamente. En ambos sistemas el puntaje global de satisfacción fue de 4/5.

Objective: Present the institutional experience on the auditory rehabilitation of patients implanted with the middle ear prosthesis Vibrant Soundbridge®. Design: Retrospective study of a cases series. Materials and Methods: Medical, surgical and audiological charts review of patients implanted with the middle ear system VSB. Hearing gain was established by the mean differences calculated on 0.5 to 3 kHz in the pure tone audiometries pre and post implantation, with and without the device. Satisfaction with the device was assessed with the Hearing Device Satisfaction Scale tool. In addition, audiological and satisfaction comparison with a population with similar characteristics of BAHA implant users was made. Results: 25 patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss were implanted with the VSB, placing the FMT on the round window in 23cases (92%). Mean auditory gain was 36 ± 16 decibels (dB). There were no significance gains between processors AP404-36 dB and Amadé-38 dB, p = 0.6. Mean auditory gain in the BAHA® users was 37 dB; speech discrimination at 65 dB was 93% and 100% for VSB and BAHA® users respectively. Overall satisfaction score for both systems was 4/5. Conclusion: The middle ear implant system VSB gives a satisfactory hearing gain to patients with moderate mixed hearing loss comparable with the BAHA® as well in satisfaction and quality of life issues.