ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2024
Long-term follow-up of Bonebridge BCI 601 implantation in microtia patients with aural atresia: Acoustic and subjective benefits.
Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2024. 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.
- Outcomes of Bonebridge Implantation in 10 Patients with Rare Genetic Syndromes and Difficult Anatomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluated the long-term acoustic and subjective outcomes of Bonebridge bone conduction implant (BCI) 601 implantation in Taiwanese patients with microtia and aural atresia (AA).
methodsA total of 41 microtia patients (28 males and 13 females; 26 with bilateral AA and 15 with unilateral AA) who received Bonebridge BCI 601 implantation between December 2014 and March 2021 at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Taiwan, were included in this retrospective study. Acoustic outcomes assessed included functional hearing gain (FHG), speech reception threshold (SRT), and word recognition score (WRS), were assessed. Subjective outcomes were assessed using the Chinese versions of four questionnaires: the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB); the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale; the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids; and the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Living.
resultsThe mean age at the time of implantation was 18.9 years (range, 6.3-54.9), and the mean follow-up duration was 6.3 years (range, 2.8-9.1). The mean unaided air conduction pure tone average (PTA4) was 65.3 ± 8.8 decibels (dB) hearing level (HL) and the mean aided sound field PTA4 was 31.1 ± 9.1 dB HL, resulting in a FHG of 34.2 ± 11.7 dB HL ( p < 0.05). After Bonebridge implantation, improvements ( p < 0.05) in the mean SRT in quiet (from 58.3 ± 7.4 dB HL to 29.4 ± 7.0 dB HL), SRT in noise (from -1.4 ± 7.3 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) to -9.6 ± 5.4 dB SNR), WRS in quiet (from 46.4 ± 26.9% to 93.8 ± 3.1%), and WRS in noise (from 46.7 ± 21.8% to 72.7 ± 19.3%) were found. Additionally, the bilateral AA group exhibited greater SRT and WRS improvements compared to the unilateral AA group ( p < 0.05). All mean subscale scores in the four questionnaires showed improvement after Bonebridge implantation, except for the mean aversiveness to sounds subscale score in the APHAB questionnaire.
conclusionBonebridge BCI 601 implantation provided long-term acoustic and subjective benefits for patients with microtia and AA, particularly those with bilateral AA.
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.