# A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Sentio Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System in the Australian Healthcare Setting

**Authors:** Magnus Värendh, Ida Haggren, Helén Lagerkvist, Maria Åberg Håkansson, Jonas Hjelmgren

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/jmahp14010008 · Journal of Market Access & Health Policy · 2026-01-27

## TL;DR

The Sentio bone conduction hearing implant is found to be a cost-effective option in Australia compared to other similar systems.

## Contribution

The study provides a novel cost-effectiveness analysis of the Sentio system in the Australian healthcare context.

## Key findings

- Sentio had lower costs and a small QALY gain compared to Osia in the base case.
- Sentio remained cost-effective relative to Ponto and Baha Attract systems.
- Over 95% of simulations showed Sentio's cost-effectiveness despite varying assumptions.

## Abstract

Bone conduction hearing implant systems (BCHIs) are established treatments for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness when conventional hearing aids are unsuitable. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the active transcutaneous system Sentio versus a similar system, i.e., Osia in an Australian setting. Scenario analyses also compared Sentio to other systems, i.e., Ponto and Baha Attract. A Markov cohort model was adapted from a previously published source to reflect Australian practice, incorporating device acquisition, surgery, maintenance, battery replacement and adverse event management over a 15-year horizon from a healthcare perspective. Effectiveness inputs were derived from published evidence using a naïve indirect comparison. Extensive sensitivity analyses and external validation tested robustness. In the base case, Sentio was associated with lower costs and a small modelled incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gain versus Osia. Scenario analyses confirmed cost-effectiveness relative to Ponto and Baha Attract, with outcomes below the Australian willingness-to-pay threshold. Health state utility, device price and reimplantation assumptions were the most influential drivers, yet Sentio remained cost-effective in over 95% of simulations. These findings support Sentio as a clinically and economically efficient BCHI in Australia and highlight the need for direct utility and long-term durability data.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** hearing loss (MESH:D034381), SSD (MESH:D012640), BCHI (MESH:D006314), -sided deafness (MESH:D003638), irritation (MESH:D001523), infections (MESH:D007239), wound infection (MESH:D014946), AE (MESH:D064420), MHL (MESH:D046089), injury to (MESH:D014947), inflammation (MESH:D007249), Pain (MESH:D010146), Mortality (MESH:D003643)
- **Chemicals:** BCHI (-)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921733/full.md

## Figures

3 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921733/full.md

## References

50 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921733/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921733