Register a trial

The ANZCTR website is back online for trial registration and updates. We apologise for any inconvenience caused while the site was inactive.



Reset your password and enable multi-factor authentication (MFA)


For ANZCTR account holders: to help ensure the cyber safety of your account, you’ll need to reset your password and set-up multi-factor authentication (MFA) as per the instructions below.


  1. Go to the Login page, click ‘reset password’ and follow the instructions.
  2. Check your email for the link to set a new password.
  3. Create a new password that meets requirements. New passwords must include at least one lowercase letter, one uppercase letter, one number and one special character (e.g. !#$%&@).
  4. Return to the Login page and enter your new password. A verification code will be sent to your email.
  5. Check your email for the code and enter it on the Login page. If the code is entered incorrectly, you can re-enter the correct one or request a new one.

Learn more about MFA and its importance on the Australian Signals Directorate website.

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov

For full trial details, please see the original record at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03086135




Registration number
NCT03086135
Ethics application status
Date submitted
9/03/2017
Date registered
22/03/2017

Titles & IDs
Public title
Clinical Performance of a New Implant System for Bone Conduction Hearing
Scientific title
Clinical Performance of a New Implant System for Bone Conduction Hearing
Secondary ID [1] 0 0
CBAS5539
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Trial acronym
Linked study record

Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Deafness; Sensoneural Single Sided 0 0
Conductive Hearing Loss 0 0
Mixed Hearing Loss 0 0
Condition category
Condition code
Ear 0 0 0 0
Deafness
Neurological 0 0 0 0
Other neurological disorders

Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Devices - Osia System

Experimental: Bone-conduction hearing device - The bone-conduction hearing device Osia system allows a direct bone-conduction through an osseointegrated implant. A magnet allows the external Sound Processor to be placed in the correct position over the implanted system including an inner magnet.


Treatment: Devices: Osia System
An external Sound Processor captures and digitize the sound which is transferred to the internal implant where it is converted to an electrical signal. The electrical signal is further transferred as a vibration through an osseointegrated implant to the mastoid bone and eventually to the cochlea.
Intervention code [1] 0 0
Treatment: Devices
Comparator / control treatment
Control group

Outcomes
Primary outcome [1] 0 0
Hearing Performance: Threshold Audiometry, Pure Tone Average of 4 Frequencies, PTA4, Unaided Versus OSIA System at 3 Months
Assessment method [1] 0 0
The change of hearing performance from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA system at 3 month, measured as free-field hearing test; Threshold audiometry PTA4 (mean of 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz) is presented. A Pure Tone Average (PTA) refers to the average of hearing threshold levels at a set of specified frequencies: typically 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz. This value gives a snapshot of an individual's hearing level. If PTA is \<25 dB, the overall hearing would be considered to be within normal limits. With a PTA of 95 dB, the hearing would be considered in the profound range. The units reported for PTA4 are decibels (dB). The results presented here are the difference of PTA4 unaided and PTA4 aided with the Osia system. An uaided PTA4 values should be higher than a aided PTA4 if the hearing device is effective. A lower or more negative score is more desirable and reflects a better ability to hear softer sounds.
Timepoint [1] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 3 months after surgery
Primary outcome [2] 0 0
Adaptive Speech Recognition in Noise, Unaided Versus OSIA System at 3 Months.
Assessment method [2] 0 0
The change of hearing performance from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA System at 3 months measured as free field hearing test Adaptive speech recognition in noise, is presented. Adaptive speech recognition in noise was measured as Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR). The noise was kept constant at 65 dB SPL and the speech was adapted in dB steps to establish the Speech-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) providing a 50% level of understanding. A ratio of 0 reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences at 65 dB, in the presence of 65 dB background noise. A negative SNR-value reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences below 65 dB, for example if 50% of the speech is received correctly at 55 dB the SNR value is -10. A positive SNR-value (Speech to Noise Ratio) reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences presented above 65 dB. A lower or more negative score is more desirable and reflects abetter hearing in a noisy enviroment.
Timepoint [2] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 3 months after surgery
Secondary outcome [1] 0 0
Hearing Performance: Threshold Audiometry, Pure Tone Average, PTA4, Unaided Versus OSIA System at 4 Weeks, 6 and 12 Months
Assessment method [1] 0 0
The change of hearing performance from the unaided hearinhg situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA system at 4 weeks, 6 and 12 months, measured as free-field hearing test: Threshold audiometry PTA4 (mean of 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz) is presented. A Pure Tone Average (PTA) refers to the average of hearing threshold levels at a set of specified frequencies: typically 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz. This value gives a snapshot of an individual's hearing level. If PTA is \<25 dB, the overall hearing would be considered to be within normal limits. With a PTA of 95 dB, the hearing would be considered in the profound range. The units reported for PTA4 are decibels (dB). The results presented here are the difference of PTA4 unaided and PTA4 aided with the Osia system. An uaided PTA4 values should be higher than a aided PTA4 if the hearing device is effective. A lower or more negative score is more desirable and reflects a better ability to hear softer sounds.
Timepoint [1] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 6 and 12 months after surgery
Secondary outcome [2] 0 0
Hearing Performance: Threshold Audiometry Individual Frequences, Unaided Versus OSIA System at 4 Weeks, 3, 6 and 12 Months
Assessment method [2] 0 0
The change of hearing performance from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA system at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months, measured as free-field hearing test: Threshold audiometry (0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 6.0 and 8.0 kHz) is presented. This value gives a snapshot of an individual's hearing level. If PTA is \<25 dB, the overall hearing would be considered to be within normal limits. With a PTA of 95 dB, the hearing would be considered in the profound range. The units reported for PTA4 are decibels (dB). The results presented here are the difference of the unaided hearing level expressed in dB and the hearing level aided with the Osia system at different time points. An unaided value should be higher than a aided if the hearing device is effective. A lower or more negative score is therefor more desirable and reflects a better ability to hear at the specified frequency.
Timepoint [2] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery.
Secondary outcome [3] 0 0
Speech in Quiet at 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL, Unaided Versus OSIA System at 4 Weeks, 3, 6 and 12 Months
Assessment method [3] 0 0
The change of hearing performance from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA System at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months, measured as free-field hearing test Speech in quiet at 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL \[% correctly perceived words at 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL\] is presented. The change in percent points is presented. A positive value indicates an improved ability to perceive words in quiet at the specified decibel (dB) level a negative value represent an impairment.
Timepoint [3] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery.
Secondary outcome [4] 0 0
Adaptive Speech Recognition in Noise, Unaided Versus OSIA System at 4 Weeks, 6 and 12 Months
Assessment method [4] 0 0
The change of hearing performance from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA System at 3 months measured as free field hearing test Adaptive speech recognition in noise, is presented. Adaptive speech recognition in noise was measured as Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR). The noise was kept constant at 65 dB SPL and the speech was adapted in dB steps to establish the Speech-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) providing a 50% level of understanding. A ratio of 0 reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences at 65 dB, in the presence of 65 dB background noise. A negative SNR-value reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences below 65 dB, for example if 50% of the speech is received correctly at 55 dB the SNR value is -10. A positive SNR-value (Speech to Noise Ratio) reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences presented above 65 dB. A lower or more negative score is more desirable and reflects a better hearing in a noisy environment.
Timepoint [4] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 6 and 12 months after surgery
Secondary outcome [5] 0 0
Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) at 3 and 12 Months
Assessment method [5] 0 0
The change of Ease of communication, Reverberation, Background noise, Aversiveness and a Global score from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA System at 3 and 12 months is presented. All subscales range from 0-100%, total score is the average of all subscales 0-100%, where 0% indicates no problem and 100% indicates always problem. The difference between the unaided and the aided situation is presented. In an ultimate case the unaided value could be 100 and the aided 0, the result is then 100. A positive value indicates an improvement, a negative value an impairment.
Timepoint [5] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 3 and 12 months after surgery
Secondary outcome [6] 0 0
Health Utility Index (HUI) at 3 and 12 Months
Assessment method [6] 0 0
The change of health status and health related quality of life from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA System at 3 and 12 months using the generic quality of life scale Health Utilities Index (HUI3) is presented. All subscales (comprehensive health state, vision, hearing, speech, ambulation, dexterity, emotion, pain, cognition) range from 0-1. A health utility value of 1.00 indicates perfect health while a score of 0.00 indicates death. The difference between the unaided and the aided situation is presented. In an ultimate case the unaided value could be 0 and the aided 1, the result is then 1.0. A positive value indicates an improved quality of life, a negative value indicates impaired quality of life.
Timepoint [6] 0 0
Baseline before surgery and 3 and 12 months after surgery
Secondary outcome [7] 0 0
Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) at 3 and 12 Months
Assessment method [7] 0 0
The change of speech, spatial and hearing experiences from the unaided hearing situation before surgery to the aided hearing situation with the OSIA System at 3 and 12 months using the SSQ scale is presented. All subscales (speech, spatial, quality) range from 0 to 10, where 0 represents "can not hear at all", and 10 "hear perfectly". Total score is a average of the subscales. A positive value indicates improved hearing, a negative value indicates impaired hearing.
Timepoint [7] 0 0
Baseline before surgery and 3 and 12 months after surgery
Secondary outcome [8] 0 0
Hearing Performance: Threshold Audiometry PTA4, With Reference Device BP110
Assessment method [8] 0 0
The change of hearing performance with the OSIA System at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months compared to the pre-operative aided situation with BP110 on softband, measured as free-field hearing test; Threshold audiometry PTA4 (mean of 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz) is presented. The units reported for PTA4 are decibels (dB). A lower or more negative score is more desirable and reflects a better ability to hear softer sounds.
Timepoint [8] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months.
Secondary outcome [9] 0 0
Hearing Performance: Threshold Audiometry Individual Frequences With Reference Device BP110
Assessment method [9] 0 0
The change of hearing performance with the OSIA System at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months compared to the pre-operative aided situation with BP110 on softband, measured as free-field hearing test; Threshold audiometry individual frequencies (0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 6.0 and 8.0 kHz) is presented. The units reported are decibels (dB). A lower or more negative score is more desirable and reflects a better ability to hear softer sounds.
Timepoint [9] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery.
Secondary outcome [10] 0 0
Speech in Quiet at 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL, With Reference Device BP110
Assessment method [10] 0 0
The change of hearing performance with the OSIA System at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months compared to the pre-operative aided situation with BP110 on softband measured as free-field hearing test; Speech in quiet \[% correctly perceived words at 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL\]. The change in percent points is presented. A positive value indicates an improved ability to perceive words in quiet at the specified decibel (dB) level a negative value represent an impairment.
Timepoint [10] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery.
Secondary outcome [11] 0 0
Adaptive Speech Recognition in Noise, With Reference Device BP110
Assessment method [11] 0 0
The change of hearing performance with the OSIA System at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months compared to the pre-operative aided situation with BP110 on softband;measured with free field hearing test Adaptive speech recognition in noise which was measured as signal to noise ratio (SNR). The noise was kept constant at 65 dB SPL and the speech was adapted in dB steps to establish the speech-to-noise ratio (SNR) providing a 50% level of understanding. A ratio of 0 reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences at 65 dB, in the presence of 65 dB background noise. A negative SNR-value reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences below 65 dB. A positive SNR-value reflects the ability to correctly hear sentences presented above 65 dB. A lower or more negative score is more desirable and represent a better hearing in a noisy environment.
Timepoint [11] 0 0
Baseline before surgery, 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery.
Secondary outcome [12] 0 0
Surgical Information: Time of Surgery
Assessment method [12] 0 0
Surgery time in minutes between first incision and last suture
Timepoint [12] 0 0
Visit 2, surgery
Secondary outcome [13] 0 0
Soft Tissue Thickness
Assessment method [13] 0 0
Surgical information: Soft tissue thickness was measured in mm
Timepoint [13] 0 0
Visit 2, surgery
Secondary outcome [14] 0 0
Soft Tissue Reduction
Assessment method [14] 0 0
Surgical information: a question was asked if soft tissue reduction had been performed. Could be answered by ticking a box for "Yes" or "No".
Timepoint [14] 0 0
Visit 2, surgery
Secondary outcome [15] 0 0
Bone Polishing/Removal at Implant Site
Assessment method [15] 0 0
Surgical information: a question is asked if bone polishing/removal at Implant site has been performed. Yes or No can be ticked.
Timepoint [15] 0 0
Visit 2, surgery
Secondary outcome [16] 0 0
Type of Anaesthesia
Assessment method [16] 0 0
Surgical information: a question is asked which type of anaesthesia has been used: local or general can be ticked.
Timepoint [16] 0 0
Visit 2, surgery
Secondary outcome [17] 0 0
Location of BI300 Implant
Assessment method [17] 0 0
Surgical information: where is the location of the BI300 implant, measured in two different ways: Alternative 1 used for the first 6 subjects: Location from the ear channel in mm. Alternative 2 used for the rest of the population 45 subjects, after an amendment: measured in mm horizontally and vertically from ear channel. and the distance in mm between the receiver and the coil. Value 9.64 mm vertically from ear channel is correct.
Timepoint [17] 0 0
Visit 2, surgery
Secondary outcome [18] 0 0
Incision Type
Assessment method [18] 0 0
Surgical information: a question was asked regarding what type of incision had been used; C-shaped flap, posterior based flap or other could be ticked.
Timepoint [18] 0 0
Visit 2, surgery
Secondary outcome [19] 0 0
Daily Usage Time of Sound Processor
Assessment method [19] 0 0
Sound processor usage time measured as hours per day.
Timepoint [19] 0 0
6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months
Secondary outcome [20] 0 0
Comfort
Assessment method [20] 0 0
Comfort of sound processor measured with a visual analogue scale where 0% is defined as no comfort at all and 100% as most comfortable imaginable, i.e. minimum 0, maximum 100.
Timepoint [20] 0 0
6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months
Secondary outcome [21] 0 0
Magnet Choice
Assessment method [21] 0 0
Available magnet strengths: 1/2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6, where 1/2 is the weakest and 6 the strongest.
Timepoint [21] 0 0
4, 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months
Secondary outcome [22] 0 0
Softpad Use
Assessment method [22] 0 0
A question was asked if the subjects used softpads; yes or no could be ticked.
Timepoint [22] 0 0
6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months

Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
* Adult subjects (18 years or older)
* Subject with conductive or mixed hearing loss in the ear to be implanted. Bone conduction thresholds with pure tone average (PTA4; mean of 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz) of 55 dB HL.

OR Subject with single-sided sensorineural deafness who is a candidate for Baha surgery. Air conduction thresholds with a pure tone average PTA4 of 20 dB HL (mean of 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 kHz) in the good ear OR subject who is indicated for an AC CROS but-for some reason-cannot or will not use an AC CROS (Air Conduction-Contralateral Routing of Signal).

* Signed informed consent
* Previous experience from amplified sound though a non-surgical solution. (For example but not limited to Hearing aid, CROS device, Bone conductional hearing device on headband/ softband)
Minimum age
18 Years
Maximum age
No limit
Sex
Both males and females
Can healthy volunteers participate?
Yes
Key exclusion criteria
* Uncontrolled diabetes as judged by the investigator.
* Condition that could jeopardise osseointegration and/or wound healing (e.g. osteoporosis, psoriasis, long-term systemic use of corticosteroids) or condition that may have an impact on the outcome of the investigation as judged by the investigator.
* Insufficient bone quality and quantity for implantation of a BI300 Implant.
* Subject that has received radiotherapy in the area of implantation, or is planned for such radiotherapy during the study period
* Use of ototoxic drugs that could be harmful to the hearing, as judged by the investigator
* Unable to follow investigational procedures, e.g. to complete quality of life scales.
* Participation in another clinical investigation with pharmaceutical and/or device.

Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Allocation to intervention
Not applicable
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Who is / are masked / blinded?



Intervention assignment
Single group
Other design features
Phase
Not applicable
Type of endpoint/s
Statistical methods / analysis

Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Data analysis
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Other reasons
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Actual
9/03/2017
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Actual
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Actual
20/06/2019
Sample size
Target
Accrual to date
Final
51
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
VIC
Recruitment hospital [1] 0 0
The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital - East Melbourne
Recruitment postcode(s) [1] 0 0
VIC 3002 - East Melbourne
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1] 0 0
United States of America
State/province [1] 0 0
Michigan
Country [2] 0 0
Germany
State/province [2] 0 0
Baden-Württemberg
Country [3] 0 0
Netherlands
State/province [3] 0 0
Nijmegen
Country [4] 0 0
Poland
State/province [4] 0 0
Nadarzyn

Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/industry
Name
Cochlear
Country

Ethics approval
Ethics application status

Summary
Brief summary
Trial website
Public notes

Contacts
Principal investigator
Name 0 0
Emmanuel Mylanus, Prof.
Address 0 0
Radboud Univerity Medical centre
Country 0 0
Phone 0 0
Email 0 0
Contact person for public queries
Name 0 0
Address 0 0
Country 0 0
Phone 0 0
Email 0 0
Contact person for scientific queries

Data sharing statement


What supporting documents are/will be available?




Results publications and other study-related documents

No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.


Results are available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03086135