Wireless CROS Versus Transcranial CROS for Unilateral Hearing Loss Eight subjects with unilateral hearing loss were fitted with wireless CROS and transcranial BTE CROS hearing aids. Results revealed that two subjects preferred the BTE transcranial CROS; four subjects preferred the wireless CROS; one subject found both hearing aid systems to be equally satisfactory; and one subject rejected both CROS ... Research Article
Research Article  |   March 01, 1995
Wireless CROS Versus Transcranial CROS for Unilateral Hearing Loss
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Michael Valente, PhD
    Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
    Washington University School of Medicine, 517 S. Euclid Ave., St. Louis, MO 63110
  • Lisa G. Potts
    Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
  • Maureen Valente
    St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO
  • Joel Goebel
    Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Hearing Aids, Cochlear Implants & Assistive Technology / Research Articles
Research Article   |   March 01, 1995
Wireless CROS Versus Transcranial CROS for Unilateral Hearing Loss
American Journal of Audiology, March 1995, Vol. 4, 52-59. doi:10.1044/1059-0889.0401.52
History: Received May 9, 1994 , Accepted July 19, 1994
 
American Journal of Audiology, March 1995, Vol. 4, 52-59. doi:10.1044/1059-0889.0401.52
History: Received May 9, 1994; Accepted July 19, 1994

Eight subjects with unilateral hearing loss were fitted with wireless CROS and transcranial BTE CROS hearing aids. Results revealed that two subjects preferred the BTE transcranial CROS; four subjects preferred the wireless CROS; one subject found both hearing aid systems to be equally satisfactory; and one subject rejected both CROS fittings. In addition, a fitting strategy is introduced using probe microphone analysis to: (a) measure trans-cranial thresholds (TCT) in the unaidable ear in dB SPL measured near the eardrum, and (b) determine the sensation level of the real ear aided response (REAR-TCT) for uncorrected and corrected speech-weighted noise. The results highlight some of the difficulties associated with successfully fitting a transcranial CROS hearing aid.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge Bill Lesiecki, Director of Audiology Services, Phonak, Inc., for arranging for the Phonak Audinet PP-C hearing aids used in this study. Finally, we would like to thank Donald Schum and two anonymous reviewers for their kind and thoughtful suggestions for improving the information contained within this manuscript.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access