Trial reportHNO2025
[Temporary postoperative care with the bone conduction hearing system ADHEAR© : A prospective study on 76 patients].
Trial report in HNO, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe tamponade applied during ear surgery causes temporary conductive hearing loss with impairment of communication. This can persist until the follow-up procedure (second look, revision) due to insufficient hearing improvement or a prolonged wound healing phase.
objectiveThis prospective study investigates the subjective and audiological benefit of temporary fitting of a bone conduction hearing aid in patients undergoing ear surgery. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients were fitted with the bone conduction hearing system ADHEAR© (MED-EL, Innsbruck, Austria) after ear surgery for the duration of tamponade. A self-developed questionnaire recorded subjective satisfaction with the system. In addition to pre- and postoperative hearing thresholds, speech comprehension was measured in quiet with and without hearing aids after tamponade removal to show the effect of the treatment after tamponade removal in patients with persistent conductive hearing loss.
resultsA total of 76 patients were tested and 92% rated the hearing aid as useful during the packed period. More than 60% rated the sound quality as natural and 79% confirmed that they would wear the ADHEAR© again if they had another ear surgery. After packing removal, the air-bone gap was below 10 dB in 66% of patients. On average, speech discrimination improved by 14% in all patients, whereby patients with a persistent sound conduction component ≥ 10 dB (n = 26) achieved the greatest improvement of 25% on average.
conclusionThe results of the study show subjective and audiological benefits with temporary fitting of an adhesive hearing aid to bridge the conductive hearing loss after ear surgery. Continued use of the ADHEAR© could benefit patients with persistent conductive hearing loss until the final fitting appointment (second look, completion of wound healing, revision surgery).
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.