Observational studyCoDAS2023
Hearing rehabilitation with Baha® transcutaneous and percutaneous systems.
Observational study in CoDAS, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Bone-Anchored Hearing Instruments in Chronic Otitis Media: A Multicenter Prospective Study.Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLongitudinally verify the influence of auditory tonal thresholds obtained with transcutaneous and percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aids on speech perception in individuals with external and/or middle ear malformation and chronic otitis media.
methodsObservational, retrospective, longitudinal follow-up study of 30 unilateral users of the transcutaneous and percutaneous Baha® system for the collection of secondary data on pure tone thresholds obtained through free field audiometry and sentence recognition threshold in silence and noise in conditions: without the prosthesis; at the time of activation; in the first month of use (post 1); and in the third month (post 2).
resultsThere was a significant difference between pure tone thresholds obtained at frequencies of 3 and 4kHz with better results for the percutaneous technique at all evaluation moments. For both systems, better performance was observed in sentence recognition in silence and in noise, with a significant difference in activation (p<0.001), but it remained stable during the other evaluation moments. The percutaneous system showed better benefit in recognizing sentences in noise only on activation (p=0.036), when compared to the transcutaneous system.
conclusionThe percutaneous system provided better audibility for high frequencies; however, such audibility did not influence sentence recognition in the silent situation for both systems. For the noise situation, better responses were observed in the percutaneous system, however, the difference was not maintained over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.