Comparison of Carina active middle-ear implant with conventional hearing aids for mixed hearing loss

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authorid0000-0002-3887-4569
dc.contributor.authorSavaş, Veysel
dc.contributor.authorGündüz, Bülent
dc.contributor.authorKaramert, Recep
dc.contributor.authorCevizci, Raşit
dc.contributor.authorDüzlü, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorTutar, Hakan
dc.contributor.authorBayazit, Yıldırım Ahmet
dc.date.accessioned10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-10T19:58:29Z
dc.date.available10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.available2019-07-10T19:58:29Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü, Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Ana Bilim Dalı
dc.descriptionWOS: 000373127800005
dc.descriptionPubMed ID: 26991874
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare the auditory outcomes of Carina middle-ear implants with those of conventional hearing aids in patients with moderate-to-severe mixed hearing loss. Methods: The study comprised nine patients (six males, three females) who underwent middle-ear implantation with Carina fully implantable active middle-ear implants to treat bilateral moderate-to-severe mixed hearing loss. The patients initially used conventional hearing aids and subsequently received the Carina implants. The hearing thresholds with implants and hearing aids were compared. Results: There were no significant differences between: the pre-operative and post-operative air and bone conduction thresholds (p > 0.05), the thresholds with hearing aids and Carina implants (p > 0.05), or the pre-operative (mean, 72.8 +/- 19 per cent) and post-operative (mean, 69.9 +/- 24 per cent) speech discrimination scores (p > 0.05). One of the patients suffered total sensorineural hearing loss three months following implantation despite an initial 38 dB functional gain. All except one patient showed clinical improvements after implantation according to quality of life questionnaire (Glasgow Benefit Inventory) scores. Conclusion: Acceptance of Carina implants is better than with conventional hearing aids in patients with mixed hearing loss, although both yield similar hearing amplification. Cosmetic reasons appear to be critical for patient acceptance.
dc.identifier.citationSavaş, V., Gündüz, B., Karamert, R., Cevizci, R., Düzlü, M., Tutar, H. ... Bayazit, Y. A. (2016). Comparison of carina active middle-ear implant with conventional hearing aids for mixed hearing loss. Journal Of Laryngology And Otology, 130(4), 340-343. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022215116000748
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0022215116000748
dc.identifier.endpage343
dc.identifier.issn0022-2151
dc.identifier.issn1748-5460
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage340
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022215116000748
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/3178
dc.identifier.volume130
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherCambridge Univ Press
dc.relation.ispartofJournal Of Laryngology And Otologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectMiddle Ear Implant
dc.subjectHearing Aids
dc.subjectMixed Hearing Loss
dc.titleComparison of Carina active middle-ear implant with conventional hearing aids for mixed hearing loss
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim
İsim:
Cevizci-Rasit 2016.pdf
Boyut:
138.66 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Makale Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu