There could be a host of reasons why you wouldn’t directly aid that ear; aside from the stated difficulty. Transcranial CROS signals aren’t always going to be beneficial to the other cochlea. Where there’s 50dB + difference between the ears, you have to be pretty judicious in the application of gain to the poorer side: if you don’t, the risk is that you’ll corrupt the hearing in the better ear.
3 Likes
That’s interesting, My feeling is that the CROS helps in quiet situations and with some directional environmental awareness, but in loud noise it may make clarity worse? Seems to over amplify background noise and transfer. I’m finding I prefer not to use it when home alone to improve the battery life of my right HA.
But, if as suggested, a high power aid was added for the left with a custom mold and properly programmed, wouldn’t there be a supportive benefit to hearing and no overamplification impact to the right aided ear?
You’re right, that’s it with CROS/BiCROS aids, understood as non-invasive devices from the same manufacturer as HA on the better ear.
@Um_bongo has told about transcranial CROS, which is invasive bone conduction device. It’s good for some, but after very judicious examination, and still relies on the better side. On the other hand, CI gave you real stimulation of the left cochlear nerve.
The only way to assess this is simply trying the HA at least for 6 months.
1 Like
The difficulty is that in order for you to hear anything on the worse ear the sound pressure intensity needs to be a couple of thousand times more than the other ear. Your audiogram is a log scale: every 3dB is a doubling of power, so the amount of sound needed just for you to start hearing is huge relative to your better cochlea.
On the other hand, if the transcranial bit is set up properly, there’s a possibility that it can be of benefit as a transcranial CROS, even if there’s no real benefit to the local ear.
2 Likes
Ok, I understand. Thanks for the information.