Supervisors info:
Γεώργιος Κορρές, Ακαδημαϊκός Υπότροφος, Ιατρική Σχολή, ΕΚΠΑ
Παύλος Μαραγκουδάκης, Καθηγητής, Ιατρική Σχολή, ΕΚΠΑ
Αλέξανδρος Δελίδης, Αναπληρωτής Καθηγητής, Ιατρική Σχολή, ΕΚΠΑ
Summary:
Introduction:
The ADHEAR is the first non-implantable bone conduction device, using an adhesive, and has been available on the market. since August 2017. Since then, it has garnered the research interest of many clinicians for its effectiveness compared to other hearing aids. This analysis includes the clinical results of studies published 6 years after its launch.
Materials:
A literature review was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar databases searching for original studies related to the indications, outcomes and limitations of the device using keywords. The initial search identified 285 papers, and applying the selection criteria narrowed it down to 31.
Results:
From the total of 31 papers, we obtained data on indications and outcomes, and from 19 papers, data on limitations. We obtained data exclusively for children, from 10 papers, and for adults from the remaining 21, of which 5 were for children as well. The functional gain ranged from 19.6 to 35.6 dB HL in children with Conductive Hearing Loss (CHL), while in adults it ranged from 14.3 to 27.5 dB HL. In children and adults, the time of daily use ranged from 6.9 to 12 hours per day. In a total of 4 papers, the indications were not those of the official manufacturers. In 10 articles the authors examined patients before and after the application of ADHEAR, without comparison with another device, and a comparison of ADHEAR - headband/softband was made in 8 articles, comparison of ADHEAR/Cros in 3, ADHEAR/Sound Arc in 2, Bonebridge/ADHEAR in 3 and ADHEAR/ BAHA attract in 1. Limitations were analyzed before and during application.
Discussion:
The functional gain in Sound Field Hearing Threshold (SFHT) and speech audiometry in quiet. and in noise between softband aids and ADHEAR is comparable, but patients find the latter easier to use. Bonebridge, outperforms in speech understanding in quiet. and noise and in SFHT in all studies. In addition, there appears to be better sound localization in a binaural application of ADHEAR compared to unilateral in binaural CHL and in bimodal amplification with Bonebridge/ADHEAR compared to Bonebridge alone in binaural CHL.
In terms of device amplification at each frequency, more amplification is highlighted at low frequencies than at high frequencies, and the device results are acceptable but less satisfactory than Cros in unilateral deafness, under conditions. Finally, the most important limitations when applying the device consist of the difficulty of sticking the sticker or falling off in an unsuspected time, phenomena of acoustic feedback, and more rarely, poor sound quality.
Conclusions:
In conclusion, the ADHEAR device is a good alternative to bone conduction hearing aids, which can be applied to children and adults with unilateral or profound CHL, especially in those who do not wish to have a surgical solution. In addition, it seems to be a good but audiologically less efficient option in patients with unilateral deafness. The data to date discourages its use for indications beyond the company's official ones and encourages its use in binaural and bimodal applications in CHL.
Keywords:
Adhear, Bone conduction hearing aid, Adhesively attached bone conduction, Adhesive bone conduction
