I sent the following to my audiologist (including article written by Phonak audiologist):
https://www.hearinglikeme.com/hearing-challenges-solved-with-titanium-hearing-aids/:42
“Titanium 3D printers are more precise and have lower tolerances than the standard acrylic printers and can result in a better fitting device. When your hearing aids fit properly, they are physically comfortable day in and day out.”
“Due to the strength of titanium custom shells, they can be printed at HALF the thickness of acrylic. The walls of the shell reduce from 0.4mm to 0.2 mm. With 0.2mm thinner walls, that added space can be used to make a bigger vent, and will result in less occlusion.”
" A thinner shell is designed to allow for deeper placement in the ear canal, helping to give users a more discreet fit."
It seems like a significant benefit that Phonak would have more space to optimize the various shape/acoustic parameters of the earmold for my extremely challenging ear canal and hearing loss.
Her response:
The printing of the earpiece is irrelevant. Acrylic molds are 3D printed as well. (Of course, a Phonak sponsored blog is going to say their product is the best; its marketing). It still requires a new impression be taken of your ear. All earmolds are created based on the impression of your ear that is sent in. It could be that the anatomy of your left ear is just not conducive to an appropriate fit earmold of any kind.
I’ve been back and forth about this multiple times, she still doesn’t seem to understand the difference. Any advice? Anyone have access to more opinions or evidence that might get her to pay attention? Thanks
You’re ignoring this member’s posts.