Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 8, 2026
Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages
Published on: March 24, 2023
Bone Conduction Implants: Comparative of Audiometric Results and Quality-of-Life Bonebridge® versus Osia®
Joan Lorente-Piera1, Raquel Manrique-Huarte1, Janaina Patricio de Lima2
1Otorhinolaryngology Department, University of Navarra Clinic, Pamplona, Spain.
Introduction:
Bone conduction implants have been indicated for patients with conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, and even profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. With the introduction of Bonebridge®, new transcutaneous implant options emerged. The latest is Osia®, a direct-drive variant or active systems, where the implant directly generates and applies vibration to the bone.
Materials And Methods:
Retrospective study of two cohorts of patients treated with active bone conduction implants at a single center, one with the Bonebridge® device and the other with Osia®.
Outcomes:
Fourteen patients were included, seven in each group (n = 14). The Bonebridge® group showed an average hearing gain in tonal intelligibility thresholds of 32.43 ± 21.39 dB and a gain in the average intelligibility threshold (with 50% discrimination) of 26.29 ± 19.10 dB. In the Osia® group, there was a gain in average tonal thresholds of 41.49 ± 14.16 dB and 23.72 ± 6.98 dB in average intelligibility thresholds. Both devices contributed to improvements in patients' quality of life, as assessed with APHAB in all the variables studied in the test. Both devices offer rehabilitation for hearing loss as an alternative to hearing aids. The Osia® system shows statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvements in mid and high frequencies, but Bonebridge® slightly outperforms in speech understanding at 50%. Differences in average tonal thresholds and quality of life are not statistically significant.
Conclusions:
While auditory improvement is observed postimplantation, other aspects, such as intelligibility thresholds and quality of life, lack statistical significance. Given the limited experience with Osia® and the small sample size, the choice of the device should be personalized. Although the literature is inconsistent due to small sample sizes and variable approaches, some studies suggest potential advantages of the Osia® system, especially in speech comprehension in different environments and greater hearing gain compared to Bonebridge®.
