Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to determine the safety and efficacy of using bone conduction via the teeth to treat Single-Sided Deafness (SSD).
The Sonitus Bone Conduction Device (BCD) is a bone conduction device for single-sided deafness (SSD). The Sonitus BCD consists of an Oral Appliance (OA), an external microphone component, worn behind the ear (BTE), a calibration interface cable and a PC-controlled calibration software for subject calibration. The Sonitus BCD picks up sounds from a microphone located within the ear canal of the deaf ear, capitalizing on the acoustics of the natural pinna and ear canal. The signal picked up by the microphone is then transmitted wirelessly to a removeable bone conduction oral appliance located on the upper molars. The oral appliance receives the acoustic signal from the BTE and applies an equivalent vibratory signal to the teeth that reaches the skull via bone conduction and routed transcranially to the contralateral cochlea.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| SoundBite Hearing System | Experimental | The objective of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of the SoundBite hearing system by Sonitus Medical and to support its intended use for the treatment of unilateral hearing loss. The SoundBite hearing system is a Bone Conduction Device (BCD) and is occasionally referred to as such in the protocol and within this report. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Sonitus Bone Conduction Hearing System | Device | Comparison of HINT scores (Speech front with noise at better ear) at 30 days tested with the device in place verses with the device removed. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Incidence of Device- and Procedure-related Adverse Events at 30 Days | The safety parameters for the trial were monitored throughout the Evaluation Phase (30 days). The safety checks included: Comprehensive Medical evaluation at Enrollment and at Termination Comprehensive Dental evaluation at Enrollment and at Termination, with interim dental checks at each visit in between, if needed Comprehensive Audiological evaluation at Enrollment and Termination. | 30 days |
| Efficacy: Ability to Understand Speech in Noise | The primary efficacy outcome was a measure of the ability to understand speech in noise while wearing the device compared with not wearing the device. The Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) was utilized for this measure as it is the most widely used test for SSD devices. An improvement in HINT score is indicated as a negative (-) dB value change. A more negative (-dB) value indicates an improvement in understanding speech in noise. An improvement in a HINT score of -1 dB is equivalent to a 10% improvement in the ability to understand speech in noise and is likely of clinical benefit. The scores are calculated as HINT Advantage (aided compared with unaided) which depict the differences of using a device as compared to not wearing a device. | Day 1, Day 30 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Measure of Benefit of SoundBite Using Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). | The measure of the benefit of the device was assessed using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), a 24-item self-assessment inventory in which the amount of difficulty in everyday situations is reported with larger numbers indicating more difficulty. Device benefit is calculated by subtracting the score obtained after using a device from the score obtained before using the device. A software program is utilized to score the APHAB and results are compared a different time points. The APHAB is well characterized and broadly used as a quantifiable measurement of device benefit. The APHAB benefit scores can range from -99 (treatment worse than no treatment) to +99 (treatment better than no treatment) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Must not be current users of devices such as Baha, CROS or TransEar
Must not have known active medical causes of SSD:
Must not have known medical problems that might be life-threatening or is a contraindication for elective dental or medical procedures
Must not have known problems that may interfere with the impression procedure, such as inability to breath through nose (e.g. severe flu, allergies or cold)
Must not have allergies to polymers
Must not have known dental abnormalities:
Must not have known Audiological conditions:
Must not have known psychological factors that interfere with their ability to comply, comprehend, consent and cooperate
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Michael Murray, MD | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hearing Resource Center | Redwood City | California | 94063 | United States | ||
| Camino Ear Nose and Throat |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16411423 | Background | Ozer E, Adelman C, Freeman S, Sohmer H. Bone conduction hearing on the teeth of the lower jaw. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol. 2002;13(2):89-96. doi: 10.1515/jbcpp.2002.13.2.89. | |
| 18569108 | Background | Soli SD, Wong LL. Assessment of speech intelligibility in noise with the Hearing in Noise Test. Int J Audiol. 2008 Jun;47(6):356-61. doi: 10.1080/14992020801895136. No abstract available. |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| SoundBite Hearing Device | View source |
Not provided
Phase 1: Enrollment: Assesses the subjects' ability to be enrolled in the trial. It included medical, audiological, and dental evaluations and device fit to ensure comfort during the duration of the trial.
Recruitment/Enrollment Phase(September 2009-November 2009) Location: Medical Clinics Meant to assess the subjects' ability to be enrolled in the trial, included Medical, Audiological and Dental evaluations.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Analyzed Group | 30 subjects were enrolled in the analyzed group with only 24 subjects expected to complete it. With an approximated 20% subject dropout rate anticipated. The total number of subjects that completed the study was 28 of 30 enrolled in the analyzed group. |
| FG001 | Pilot Group | Per the protocol, the first five (5) subjects were enrolled in the "pilot group" of the study to work out the process flow and training of the centers and participants. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
35 subjects were enrolled in this study.Per protocol,the first 5 subjects enrolled were the pilot phase of the study. Data obtained from the first 5 subjects were excluded from analyses.An approximated 20% subject dropout rate anticipated, 30 subjects were enrolled with 24 subjects expected complete.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Analyzed Group | A total of thirty-five (35) subjects were enrolled in this study. Per the protocol, the first five (5) subjects enrolled were the pilot phase of the study to work out the process flow and training of the centers and participants. The data obtained from the first five subjects were excluded from all analyses. With an approximated 20% subject dropout rate anticipated, 30 subjects were enrolled in the study with only 24 subjects expected to complete it. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical | Count of Participants |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Incidence of Device- and Procedure-related Adverse Events at 30 Days | The safety parameters for the trial were monitored throughout the Evaluation Phase (30 days). The safety checks included: Comprehensive Medical evaluation at Enrollment and at Termination Comprehensive Dental evaluation at Enrollment and at Termination, with interim dental checks at each visit in between, if needed Comprehensive Audiological evaluation at Enrollment and Termination. | Posted | Number | participants | 30 days |
|
30 days
Incidence of device- and procedure-related adverse events at 30 days
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Incidence of Device- and Procedure-related Adverse Events | Incidence of device- and procedure-related adverse events at 30 days |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical Trials Manager | Sonitus Medical, Inc. | 8668162076 | lily@sonitusmedical.com |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D046088 | Hearing Loss, Unilateral |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D034381 | Hearing Loss |
| D006311 | Hearing Disorders |
| D004427 | Ear Diseases |
| D010038 | Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| SoundBite | Device |
|
| SoundBite Hearing System | Device |
|
| 30 days |
| San Jose |
| California |
| 95123 |
| United States |
| 4712563 | Background | Dahlin GC, Allen FG, Collard EW. Bone-conduction thresholds of human teeth. J Acoust Soc Am. 1973 May;53(5):1434-7. doi: 10.1121/1.1913490. No abstract available. |
| 11404603 | Background | Wazen JJ, Spitzer J, Ghossaini SN, Kacker A, Zschommler A. Results of the bone-anchored hearing aid in unilateral hearing loss. Laryngoscope. 2001 Jun;111(6):955-8. doi: 10.1097/00005537-200106000-00005. |
| 12958575 | Background | 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 Sep;129(3):248-54. doi: 10.1016/S0194-5998(03)00527-8. |
| 10489868 | Background | Stenfelt SP, Hakansson BE. Sensitivity to bone-conducted sound: excitation of the mastoid vs the teeth. Scand Audiol. 1999;28(3):190-8. doi: 10.1080/010503999424761. |
| 21799455 | Background | Murray M, Miller R, Hujoel P, Popelka GR. Long-term safety and benefit of a new intraoral device for single-sided deafness. Otol Neurotol. 2011 Oct;32(8):1262-9. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31822a1cac. |
| 22403981 | Background | Miller R, Hujoel P, Murray M, Popelka GR. Safety of an intra-oral hearing device utilizing a split-mouth research design. J Clin Dent. 2011;22(5):159-62. |
| 19816229 | Background | Popelka GR, Derebery J, Blevins NH, Murray M, Moore BC, Sweetow RW, Wu B, Katsis M. Preliminary evaluation of a novel bone-conduction device for single-sided deafness. Otol Neurotol. 2010 Apr;31(3):492-7. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3181be6741. |
| 21221045 | Result | Murray M, Popelka GR, Miller R. Efficacy and safety of an in-the-mouth bone conduction device for single-sided deafness. Otol Neurotol. 2011 Apr;32(3):437-43. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3182096b1d. |
| BG001 | Pilot Group | A total of thirty-five (35) subjects were enrolled in this study. Per the protocol, the first five (5) subjects enrolled were the pilot phase of the study to work out the process flow and training of the centers and participants. The data obtained from the first five subjects were excluded from all analyses. With an approximated 20% subject dropout rate anticipated, 30 subjects were enrolled in the study with only 24 subjects expected to complete it. |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Participants |
|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
|
|
| Primary | Efficacy: Ability to Understand Speech in Noise | The primary efficacy outcome was a measure of the ability to understand speech in noise while wearing the device compared with not wearing the device. The Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) was utilized for this measure as it is the most widely used test for SSD devices. An improvement in HINT score is indicated as a negative (-) dB value change. A more negative (-dB) value indicates an improvement in understanding speech in noise. An improvement in a HINT score of -1 dB is equivalent to a 10% improvement in the ability to understand speech in noise and is likely of clinical benefit. The scores are calculated as HINT Advantage (aided compared with unaided) which depict the differences of using a device as compared to not wearing a device. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | dB | Day 1, Day 30 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Measure of Benefit of SoundBite Using Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). | The measure of the benefit of the device was assessed using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), a 24-item self-assessment inventory in which the amount of difficulty in everyday situations is reported with larger numbers indicating more difficulty. Device benefit is calculated by subtracting the score obtained after using a device from the score obtained before using the device. A software program is utilized to score the APHAB and results are compared a different time points. The APHAB is well characterized and broadly used as a quantifiable measurement of device benefit. The APHAB benefit scores can range from -99 (treatment worse than no treatment) to +99 (treatment better than no treatment) | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Global Benefit Score | 30 days |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 28 |
| 0 |
| 28 |
Not provided
| D012678 |
| Sensation Disorders |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |