Comparison of Satisfaction Between Patients Using Percutaneous and Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Devices

Area of Science:

• Audiology
• Biomedical Engineering
• Otolaryngology

Background:

• Bone conduction devices treat hearing loss and single-sided deafness (SSD).
• Transcutaneous systems offer fewer local reactions than percutaneous systems.
• Patient satisfaction with percutaneous vs. transcutaneous bone conduction devices requires evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

• Compare patient satisfaction between percutaneous and transcutaneous bone conduction devices.
• Assess the impact of device type on hearing loss treatment outcomes.
• Identify factors influencing patient satisfaction with bone conduction technology.

Main Methods:

• 72 patients were grouped by hearing loss type and device system (percutaneous vs. transcutaneous).
• Patient satisfaction was measured using the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire and a custom usefulness questionnaire.
• Daily wearing time and correlation with bone conduction levels were analyzed.

Main Results:

• Patients wore percutaneous devices (12 hours/day) significantly longer than transcutaneous devices (7 hours/day).
• Single-sided deafness (SSD) patients reported lower satisfaction with transcutaneous devices compared to percutaneous.
• Combined hearing loss patients also showed higher satisfaction with percutaneous devices.

Conclusions:

• Both bone conduction device types are safe and effective for appropriate candidates.
• Percutaneous devices yielded higher patient satisfaction than transcutaneous devices, particularly for SSD and combined hearing loss.
• Preoperative counseling is crucial for SSD patients considering transcutaneous devices due to lower satisfaction rates.