122 Chapter 4.2 Table 2: Aetiology of conductive hearing loss. Inherited genetic disorders include CHARGE, Down’s, Noonans, xxx, PCD and 22.q.11. Aetiology Number of children Atresia/microtia as part of another condition Isolate microtia or atresia Ventilation disorders CSOM Inherited genetic disorder Cleft Other 25 14 13 10 10 2 8 Ventilation disorders included, chronic perforation, retraction, tympanoplasty, OME. Other diagnosis includes Arthrogryposis, Haemangioma, Blind end ear canal, and unrecorded (n = 4). 72 (87.8%) of all 82 fitted children continue to use the device daily. A total of 10 (12.2%) children are no longer users the aid. Of these, 5 (6.1%) no longer used any hearing aid device and 5 (6.1%) use alternative aids. The alternatives included spectacle aids (n = 2) and implant retained hearing devices (n = 3). Patient preference was the main influencing factor for the 5 children who no longer use any form of hearing device. Feedback from these individuals reported they did not find any hearing aids useful or they were planning to have more advanced hearing reconstructive surgery. Of the 5 individuals who were provided alternative hearing devices, those children who needed to wear spectacles, reported positioning problems with the adhesive device and therefore were successfully fitted with spectacle aids. Of the three individuals who were subsequently implanted, one aged 10 years old chose the implant retained device due to challenging behavioral issues affecting their compliance with the adhesive aid and softband aids. After extensive discussion and counseling the family decided that an implant would be more suitable and have better daily use. The further 2 individuals who underwent implant retained surgery reported no adverse complication or compliance issues with the adhesive aid. The decision to change was based upon their positive experiences with a bone conducting headband device. Within our cohort of patients, on average the adhesive pad required replacement every second day keeping in line with the manufacture guidelines. 7 (8.5%) children reported an increased frequency of replacement above the manufacturer’s recommendation of three times per week. One child required a change of adhesive pad up to four times per day due to the nature of his skin type whereas other individuals reported 7-day use from a single adhesive pad.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw