Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
Published in: BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Study protocol

Comparison of the benefits of cochlear implantation versus contra-lateral routing of signal hearing aids in adult patients with single-sided deafness: study protocol for a prospective within-subject longitudinal trial

Authors: Pádraig T Kitterick, Gerard M O’Donoghue, Mark Edmondson-Jones, Andrew Marshall, Ellen Jeffs, Louise Craddock, Alison Riley, Kevin Green, Martin O’Driscoll, Dan Jiang, Terry Nunn, Shakeel Saeed, Wanda Aleksy, Bernhard U Seeber

Published in: BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Individuals with a unilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss, or single-sided deafness, report difficulty with listening in many everyday situations despite having access to well-preserved acoustic hearing in one ear. The standard of care for single-sided deafness available on the UK National Health Service is a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid which transfers sounds from the impaired ear to the non-impaired ear. This hearing aid has been found to improve speech understanding in noise when the signal-to-noise ratio is more favourable at the impaired ear than the non-impaired ear. However, the indiscriminate routing of signals to a single ear can have detrimental effects when interfering sounds are located on the side of the impaired ear. Recent published evidence has suggested that cochlear implantation in individuals with a single-sided deafness can restore access to the binaural cues which underpin the ability to localise sounds and segregate speech from other interfering sounds.

Methods/Design

The current trial was designed to assess the efficacy of cochlear implantation compared to a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid in restoring binaural hearing in adults with acquired single-sided deafness. Patients are assessed at baseline and after receiving a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid. A cochlear implant is then provided to those patients who do not receive sufficient benefit from the hearing aid. This within-subject longitudinal design reflects the expected care pathway should cochlear implantation be provided for single-sided deafness on the UK National Health Service. The primary endpoints are measures of binaural hearing at baseline, after provision of a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid, and after cochlear implantation. Binaural hearing is assessed in terms of the accuracy with which sounds are localised and speech is perceived in background noise. The trial is also designed to measure the impact of the interventions on hearing- and health-related quality of life.

Discussion

This multi-centre trial was designed to provide evidence for the efficacy of cochlear implantation compared to the contra-lateral routing of signals. A purpose-built sound presentation system and established measurement techniques will provide reliable and precise measures of binaural hearing.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials http://​www.​controlled-trials.​com/​ISRCTN33301739 (05/JUL/2013)
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Baguley DM, Bird J, Humphriss RL, Prevost AT:The evidence base for the application of contralateral bone anchored hearing aids in acquired unilateral sensorineural hearing loss in adults. Clin Otolaryngol. 2006, 31: 6-14.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Douglas SA, Yeung P, Daudia A, Gatehouse S, O’Donoghue GM:Spatial hearing disability after acoustic neuroma removal. Laryngoscope. 2007, 117: 1648-1651.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Giolas TG, Wark DJ:Communication problems associated with unilateral hearing loss. J Speech Hear Disord. 1967, 32 (4): 336-343.CrossRefPubMed
4.
McLeod B, Upfold L, Taylor A:Self reported hearing difficulties following excision of vestibular schwannoma. Int J Audiol. 2008, 47: 420-430.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Laszig R, Beck R, Schild C, Kroeger S, Ihorst G, Wesarg T:Comparison of pseudobinaural hearing to real binaural hearing rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness and tinnitus. Otol Neurotol. 2011, 32: 39-47.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Hol MKS, Bosman AJ, Snik AFM, Mylanus EAM, Cremers CWRJ:Bone-anchored hearing aid in unilateral inner ear deafness: A study of 20 patients. Audiol Neuro Otol. 2004, 9: 274-281.CrossRef
7.
Niparko JK, Cox KM, Lustig LR:Comparison of the bone anchored hearing aid implantable hearing device with contralateral routing of offside signal amplification in the rehabilitation of unilateral deafness. Otol Neurotol. 2003, 24 (1): 73-78.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Wazen JJ, Ghossaini SN, Spitzer JB, Kuller M:Localization by unilateral BAHA users. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005, 132 (6): 928-932.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Harford E, Barry J:A rehabilitative approach to the problem of unilateral hearing impairment: The contralateral routing of signals (CROS). J Speech Hear Disord. 1965, 30: 121-138.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Bosman AJ, Hol MKS, Snik AFM, Mylanus EAM, Cremers CWRJ:Bone-anchored hearing aids in unilateral inner ear deafness. Acta Oto-laryngologica. 2003, 123 (2): 258-260.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Hol MKS, Kunst SJW, Snik AFM, Cremers CWRJ:Pilot study on the effectiveness of the conventional CROS, the transcranial CROS and the BAHD transcranial CROS in adults with unilateral inner ear deafness. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010, 267 (6): 889-896.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Lin LM, Bowditch S, Anderson MJ, May B, Cox KM, Niparko JK:Amplification in the rehabilitation of unilateral deafness: speech in noise and directional hearing effects with bone-anchored hearing and contralateral routing of signal amplification. Otol Neurotol. 2006, 27 (2): 172-182.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Wazen JJ, Spitzer JB, Ghossaini SN, Fayad JN, Niparko JK, Cox K, Brackmann DE, Soli SD:Transcranial contralateral cochlear stimulation in unilateral deafness. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003, 129: 248-254.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Gelfand SA:Usage of CROS hearing aids by unilaterally deaf patients. Arch Otolaryngol. 1979, 105 (6): 328-332.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Bishop CE, Eby TL:The current status of audiologic rehabilitation for profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Laryngoscope. 2010, 120 (3): 552-556.CrossRefPubMed
16.
17.
Zawawi F, Kabbach G, Lallemand M, Daniel SJ:Bone-anchored hearing aid: Why do some patients refuse it?. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2013, 78 (2): 232-234.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Firszt JB, Holden LK, Reeder RM, Waltzman SB, Arndt S:Auditory abilities after cochlear implantation in adults with unilateral deafness: a pilot study. Otol Neurotol. 2012, 33 (8): 1339-1346.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Vermeire K, Van de Heyning P:Binaural hearing after cochlear implantation in subjects -with unilateral sensorineural deafness and tinnitus. Audiol Neuro Otol. 2009, 14: 163-171.CrossRef
20.
Gatehouse S, Noble W:The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol. 2004, 43 (2): 85-99.CrossRefPubMed
21.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence:Technology Appraisal Guidance 166: Cochlear Implants for Children and Adults with Severe to Profound Deafness. 2009,, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. [http://​www.​nice.​org.​uk/​TA166],
22.
Tyler RS, Parkinson AJ, Woodworth GG, Lowder MW, Gantz BJ:Performance over time of adult patients using the ineraid or nucleus cochlear implant. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997, 102 (1): 508-522.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Ruffin CV, Tyler RS, Witt SA, Dunn CC, Gantz BJ, Rubinstein JT:Long-term performance of clarion 1.0 cochlear implant users. Laryngoscope. 2007, 117 (7): 1183-1190.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Altman DG:Chapter 16: special topics in statistics. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). Edited by: The Cochrane Collaboration, Green S, Higgins JPT, Higgins JPT, Green S. 2011, Available from http://​www.​cochrane-handbook.​org.,
25.
26.
Pumford J:Benefits of probe-mic measures with CROS/BiCROS fittings. Hear J. 2005, 50 (10): 34-40.CrossRef
27.
Lantz J, Jensen OD, Haastrup A, Olsen SO:Real-ear measurement verification for open, non-occluding hearing instruments. Int J Audiol. 2007, 46: 11-16.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Seeber BU, Kerber S, Hafter ER:A system to simulate and reproduce audio-visual environments for spatial hearing research. Hear Res. 2010, 260 (1–2): 1-10.CrossRefPubMed
29.
30.
Kerber S, Seeber BU:Localization in reverberation with cochlear implants: predicting performance from basic psychophysical measures. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2013, 14 (3): 379-392.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Seeber BU:A new method for localization studies. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2002, 88 (3): 446-450.
32.
Boothroyd A:Developments in speech audiometry. Br J Audiol. 1968, 2 (1): 3-10.CrossRef
33.
Ricketts T, Grantham DW, D’Haese P, Edwards J, Barco A:Cochlear implant speech processor placement and compression effects on sound sensitivity and interaural level difference. J Am Acad Audiol. 2006, 17 (2): 133-140.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Wiggins IM, Seeber BU:Dynamic-range compression affects the lateral position of sounds. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011, 130 (6): 3939-3953.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Seeber BU, Fastl H:Localization cues with bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008, 123 (2): 1030-1042.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Rothauser EH, Chapman ND, Guttman N, Nordby KS, Silbiger HR, Urbanek GE, Weinstock M:Ieee recommended practice for speech quality measurements. IEEE Trans Audio Electroacoust. 1969, 17 (3): 225-246.CrossRef
37.
Plomp P, Mimpen AM:Improving the reliability of testing the speech perception threshold for sentences. Audiology. 1979, 18: 43-52.CrossRefPubMed
38.
MacKeith NW, Coles RRA:Binaural advantages in hearing of speech. J Laryngol Otol. 1971, 85 (3): 213-232.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Gatehouse S, Noble W:The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol. 2004, 43: 85-99.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Noble W, Gatehouse S:Effects of bilateral versus unilateral hearing aid fitting on abilities measured by the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol. 2006, 45 (3): 172-181.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Noble W, Tyler R, Dunn C, Bhullar N:Unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants and the implant-plus-hearing-aid profile: comparing self-assessed and measured abilities. Int J Audiol. 2008, 47 (8): 505-514.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Singh G, Pichora-Fuller KM:Older adults’ performance on the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ): Test-retest reliability and a comparison of interview and self-administration methods. Int J Audiol. 2010, 49 (10): 733-740.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Gatehouse S:Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile: derivation and validation of a client-centered outcome measure for hearing-aid services. J Am Acad Audiol. 1999, 10: 80-103.
44.
Gatehouse S:A self-report outcome measure for the evaluation of hearing-aid fittings and services. Health Bull. 1999, 57: 424-436.
45.
Robinson K, Gatehouse S, Browning GG:Measuring patient benefit from otorhinolaryngological surgery and therapy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1996, 105: 415-422.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Summerfield AQ, Barton GR, Toner J, McAnallen C, Proops D, Harries C, Cooper H, Court I, Gray R, Osborne J, Doran M, Ramsden R, Mawman D, O’Driscoll M, Graham J, Aleksy W, Meerton L, Verschure C, Ashcroft P, Pringle M:Self-reported benefits from successive bilateral cochlear implantation in post-lingually deafened adults: randomised controlled trial. Int J Audiol. 2006, 45 (1): 99-107.CrossRef
47.
Meikle MB, Henry JA, Griest SE, Stewart BJ, Abrams HB, McArdle R, Myers PJ, Newman CW, Sandridge S, Turk DC, Folmer RL, Frederick EJ, House JW, Jacobson GP, Kinney SE, Martin WH, Nagler SM, Reich GE, Searchfield G, Sweetow R, Vernon JA:The tinnitus functional index: development of a new clinical measure for chronic intrusive tinnitus. Ear Hear. 2012, 33 (2): 153-176.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW:Multi-attribute health status classification systems: health utilities index. PharmacoEconomics. 1995, 7 (6): 490-502.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, Goldsmith C, DePauw S, Boyle M, Denton M, Zhu Z:Multiplicative multi-attribute utility function for the health utilities index mark 3 (HUI3) system: a technical report.Working Paper Series 98-11. 1998, Ontario, Canada: McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University,
50.
Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW, Goldsmith CH, Zhu Z, DePauw S, Denton M, Boyle M:Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Med Care. 2002, 40 (2): 113-128.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Barton GR, Bankart J, Davis AC, Summerfield QA:Comparing utility scores before and after hearing-aid provision: results according to the EQ-5D, HUI3 and SF-6D. Appl Health Econ Health Pol. 2004, 3 (2): 103-105.CrossRef
52.
Grutters JP, Joore MA, van der Horst F, Verschuure H, Dreschler WA, Anteunis LJ:Choosing between measures: comparison of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in persons with hearing complaints. Qual Life Res. 2007, 16 (8): 1439-1449.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
53.
UK Cochlear Implant Study Group:Criteria of candidacy for unilateral cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults I: theory and measures of effectiveness. Ear Hear. 2004, 25 (4): 310-335.CrossRef
54.
55.
EuroQol Group:Euroqol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990, 16 (3): 199-208.CrossRef
56.
57.
Barton GR, Summerfield AQ, Marshall DH, Bloor KE:Choice of instrument for measuring the gain in utility from cochlear implantation. Proceedings of the UK Health Economics Study Group Meeting, January 2001, Oxford. 2001, Oxford, UK: Health Economics Study Group,
58.
Metadata
Title
Comparison of the benefits of cochlear implantation versus contra-lateral routing of signal hearing aids in adult patients with single-sided deafness: study protocol for a prospective within-subject longitudinal trial
Authors
Pádraig T Kitterick
Gerard M O’Donoghue
Mark Edmondson-Jones
Andrew Marshall
Ellen Jeffs
Louise Craddock
Alison Riley
Kevin Green
Martin O’Driscoll
Dan Jiang
Terry Nunn
Shakeel Saeed
Wanda Aleksy
Bernhard U Seeber
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6815
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6815-14-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders 1/2014 Go to the issue

Reviewer acknowledgement

Annual acknowledgement of manuscript reviewers

Study protocol

A global patient outcomes registry: Cochlear paediatric implanted recipient observational study (Cochlear™ P-IROS)

Research article

Prognostic impact of standard laboratory values on outcome in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss

Research article

Acute cervical lymphadenitis and infections of the retropharyngeal and parapharyngeal spaces in children

Case report

Nasopharyngeal leiomyomatous hamartoma: case report

Research article

Combined examination of sequence and copy number variations in human deafness genes improves diagnosis for cases of genetic deafness