Participant valued appearance of bone conduction devices: a comparison between percutaneous and transcutaneous systems.

Purpose: To investigate whether the appearance of percutaneous bone conduction devices (perBCDs) or active transcutaneous bone conduction devices (atBCDs) is preferred by BCD-users and non-users. The second aim is to examine the degree to which the appearance of a device matters in comparison to other BCD traits, and whether certain participant characteristics predict this.

Methods: An online questionnaire was designed and administered to BCD-users and non-users (i.e., persons with no experience using a BCD). Pair-wise comparisons showing pictures of the latest generation perBCD and atBCD sound processors and implant sites were anonymously provided to participants, who could indicate their preference. Sum scores were calculated ranging from - 2 (strong preference for perBCD) to 2 (strong preference for atBCD). Means for the total score as well as sub scores of pictures showing either sound processor or implant site were calculated. Statements were presented in which the appearance of the device was weighed against other traits such as better hearing.

Results: The study population consisted of 102 BCD-users and 105 non-users. An overall preference for perBCD sound processors was observed (mean score - 0.50 (95% CI: -0.63, -0.37). BCD-users had no preference for implant sites whilst non-users preferred atBCDs (-0.03 (-0.27, 0.21) and 0.60 (0.40, 0.80) respectively, p < 0.01). Most participants found better hearing more important than having an appealing device (n = 150, 73.0%).

Conclusions: PerBCD sound processors were preferred over atBCD sound processors by both BCD-users and non-users. Functionality seems to be more important than the appearance of the device.