43 research outputs found
The Birmingham bone anchored hearing aid programme. Some audiological and qualitity of life outcomes
Get PDFContains fulltext :
mmubn000001_380491613.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)KUN, 28 mei 2002Promotor : Cremers, C.W.R.J. Co-promotor : Proops, D.W
Benefit and succes of Bone Anchored Hearing Aid
No full textContains fulltext :
71475.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)RU Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, 23 juni 2008Promotor : Cremers, C.W.R.J. Co-promotor : Proops, D.W.198 p
Bone-anchored hearing aids for people with bilateral hearing impairment: a systematic review
Get PDFBACKGROUND: Bone-anchored hearing aids (BAHAs) are indicated for people with conductive or mixed hearing loss who can benefit from amplification of sound. In resource limited health care systems, it is important that evidence regarding the benefit of BAHAs is critically appraised to aid decision-making.OBJECTIVE OF REVIEW: To assess the clinical effectiveness of BAHAs for people with bilateral hearing impairment.TYPE OF REVIEW: Systematic review.SEARCH STRATEGY: Nineteen electronic resources were searched from inception to November 2009. Additional studies were sought from reference lists, clinical experts and BAHA manufacturers.EVALUATION METHOD: Inclusion criteria were applied by two reviewers independently. Data extraction and quality assessment of full papers were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second. Studies were synthesised through narrative review with tabulation of results.RESULTS: Twelve studies were included. Studies suggested audiological benefits of BAHAs when compared with bone-conduction hearing aids or no aiding. A mixed pattern of results was seen when BAHAs were compared to air-conduction hearing aids. Improvements in quality of life with BAHAs were found by a hearing-specific instrument but not generic quality of life measures. Issues such as improvement of discharging ears and length of time the aid can be worn were not adequately addressed by the studies. Studies demonstrated some benefits of bilateral BAHAs. Adverse events data were limited. The quality of the studies was low.CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence is weak. As such, caution is indicated in the interpretation of presently available data. However, based on the available evidence, BAHAs appear to be a reasonable treatment option for people with bilateral conductive or mixed hearing loss. Further research into the benefits of BAHAs, including quality of life, is required to reduce the uncertainty.<br/
Bone-anchored hearing aids for people who are bilaterally deaf: a systematic review and economic evaluation
No full textThe aim of this systematic review, using standard methodology,was to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of bone-anchored hearing aids (BAHAs) for people who are bilaterally deaf. Prospective studies comparing BAHAs versus conventional hearing aids [air conduction hearing aid (ACHA) or bone conduction hearing aid (BCHA)], unaided hearing or ear surgery; and unilateral versus bilateral BAHAs were eligible. Twelve clinical effectiveness studies were included. No eligible comparisons with ear surgery were identified. Overall quality was rated as weak for all included studies.There appeared to be some audiological benefits of BAHAs compared with BCHAs and improvements in speech understanding in noise compared with ACHAs, however ACHAs may produce better audiological results for other outcomes; the limited evidence reduces certainty. Hearing is improved with BAHAs compared with unaided hearing. Improvements in QoL with BAHAs were identified by a hearing-specific instrument but not generic QoL measures. Studies comparing unilateral with bilateral BAHAs suggested benefits of bilateral BAHAs in many, but not all, situations.A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the costs and benefits of unilateral BAHAs over a ten year time horizon. The incremental cost per user receiving BAHA, compared with BCHA, was £16,344 for children and £13,281 for adults. In an exploratory analysis the incremental cost per QALY gained was between £118,898 and £55,424 for children and between £98,790 to £46,051 for adults for BAHAs compared with BCHA, depending on the assumed QoL gain and proportion of each modelled cohort using their hearing aid for eight or more hours per day. Deterministic sensitivity analysis suggested results were highly sensitive to the assumed proportion of people using BCHA for eight or more hours per day.Exploratory cost effectiveness analysis suggests that BAHAs are unlikely to be a cost effective option where the benefi ts are similar for BAHAs and their comparators. The greater the benefit from aided hearing and the greater the difference in the proportion of people using the hearing aid for eight hours or more per day, the more likely BAHAs are to be a cost effective option. The inclusion of other dimensions of QoL may also increase the likelihood of BAHAs being a cost effective option.A national audit of BAHAs is needed to provide clarity on the many areas of uncertainty surrounding BAHAs
Replies to Critics of the Fiery Test of Critique
Get PDFA set of replies to critics of my 2021 book 'The Fiery Test of Critique: A Reading of Kant's Dialectic' (OUP).
The criticisms are based on talks given at an Author-meets-critics symposium at Princeton University on April 22nd, 2023. The critics are: Beatrice Longuenesse, Patricia Kitcher, Allen Wood, Des Hogan, and Anja Jauernig
Impact Analysis and Extraction Method: Applications on water resources in Andalusia
Get PDFThe objective of this work is to deepen in the relationships between the andalusian productive system and the water consumption. We will use an Impact Analysis and the Extraction Method. The first one allows us to study how it would affect to the regional water consumption a change in the sectorial demand. The second one allows us to simulate how it would affect to the water consumption the hypothetical extraction of a certain sector of the economic system. This study allows us to conclude that a reduction in the exports of some sectors would affect positively on the water saving; and that the extraction, fundamentally of the agro-alimentary industry, would considerably reduce the consumption of this resource. Before this reality we raised the possibility of considering a structural change in the region that consists of a productive specialization less water consumer.Input-Output analysis, Water consumption, Andalusian
