Transcutaneous versus percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aids: A quality of life comparison.
American journal of otolaryngology
PURPOSE: To determine whether patients have improved quality of life outcomes with percutaneous bone conduction implant (p-BCI) versus transcutaneous bone conduction implant (t-BCI).
MATERIALS & METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients who have undergone placement of a BCI in the Ascension St John Providence Health System from 2013 to 2018. Patient satisfaction of t-BCI and p-BCI was measured using a questionnaire that incorporated the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and BAHA, aesthetic, hygiene & use (BAHU) survey. Key outcome variables were separated into 2 categories: (1) evaluation of wound healing and implant-associated complications, and (2) quality of life improvements.
RESULTS: Comparative analysis of the 27 p-BCI patients and 10 t-BCI patients showed overall positive benefit with no statistically significant difference on quality of life improvement between the two groups. Total complication rates for p-BCI (48.1 %) vs t-BCI (10 %) was marginally significant (p = 0.056). Rate of revision for p-BCI versus t-BCI was 14.8 % vs 0 %, respectively.
CONCLUSION: This study provides a much-needed comparative insight in patient's experience with these two devices. Understanding which device is preferable in the patient's view will offer helpful information for guiding proper implant selection.
Robinette K, Sims J, Pang B, Babu S. Transcutaneous versus percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aids: a quality of life comparison. Am J Otolaryngol. 2023 Mar-Apr;44(2):103758. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2022.103758. PMID: 36610247.