Equal-loudness levels measured with the method of constant stimuli Equal-loudness level contours for pure tone under free-field listening conditions (II).

A number of experimental determinations of the uncomfortable loudness level (ULL) at 1000 Hz were made on several groups of normal-hearing subjects, using various methods of stimulus presentation and applying different personality measures to the subjects. The same mean levels were found for both earphone and free-field presentations. In experienced subjects the monaural-binaural difference was between 2.5 and 4 dB in different experiments. In naive subjects this difference was 6 dB. In two groups of subjects, ULL was found to be significantly negatively correlated with their test anxiety scores, but this correlation did not hold for the other two groups tested. Naive subjects showed little difference in intersubject variance with the manual or Bekesy presentation techniques.

Download Full-text

Relationship of pure tone air conduction threshold, most comfortable loudness level (MCL), and uncomfortable loudness level (UCL).

AUDIOLOGY JAPAN ◽

10.4295/audiology.32.321 ◽

1989 ◽

Vol 32 (5) ◽

pp. 321-322

Author(s):

YOSHIKAZU OBARA

Keyword(s):

Pure Tone ◽

Loudness Level ◽

Comfortable Loudness ◽

Relationship Of ◽

Air Conduction

Download Full-text

Estimation of the Benefit of Bone-Anchored Hearing Aids

Annals of Otology Rhinology & Laryngology ◽

10.1177/000348949410301108 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 103 (11) ◽

pp. 872-878 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

George G. Browning ◽

Stuart Gatehouse

Keyword(s):

Hearing Aids ◽

Pure Tone ◽

Bone Conduction ◽

Free Field ◽

Chronic Otitis Media ◽

Valuable Alternative ◽

Hearing Ability ◽

Bone Anchored Hearing Aid ◽

Bone Conduction Hearing ◽

Air Conduction

Implantable bone conduction hearing aids are a valuable alternative to conventional aids for those who cannot use a conventional air conduction aid or find it difficult to use because of an aural discharge, most commonly due to chronic otitis media. Previously reported series of the use of a bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) come from the originators of this device, and an independent report of their benefit and use, especially in previous air conduction aid users, would be of value. Twenty-three patients were evaluated at least 6 months after implantation of a BAHA. All 7 previous bone conduction aid users were delighted with their BAHA, reporting increased comfort and hearing benefit that was backed by audiometric evidence. Of the 16 individuals who previously used an air conduction aid, 11 (69%) were delighted users of their BAHA. Unfortunately, the other 5 (31%) reverted to solely using their air conduction aid. There was no obvious predictor as to how these individuals might have been identified prior to implantation. In particular, their pure tone thresholds, especially the bone conduction thresholds, were no different from those of the 11 BAHA users. However, in free field audiometry, the users gained superior benefit from their BAHA compared to their air conduction aid, whereas the nonusers did not. In conclusion, in all series to date, previous users of a conventional bone conduction aid have been delighted users of a BAHA and have gained superior audiometric benefit. This is not necessarily the case with previous air conduction aid users. As most patients rate hearing ability to be more important than absence of an aural discharge, it is important to develop methods that might predict benefit from a BAHA prior to implantation.

Download Full-text

Threshold of hearing for pure tone under free-field listening conditions.

Journal of the Acoustical Society of Japan (E) ◽

10.1250/ast.15.159 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 15 (3) ◽

pp. 159-169 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Hisashi Takeshima ◽

Yôiti Suzuki ◽

Masazumi Kumagai ◽

Toshio Sone ◽

Takeshi Fujimori ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Pure Tone ◽

Free Field

Download Full-text

A comparative study of smartphone based app with free field hearing for possible use as a screening test

International Journal of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery ◽

10.18203/issn.2454-5929.ijohns20173052 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 3 (3) ◽

pp. 710

Author(s):

Himanshu Swami ◽

Aditya Bhargava ◽

Sabarigirish K. ◽

Arvind B. M.

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Comparative Study ◽

Gold Standard ◽

Military Service ◽

Pure Tone ◽

Early Stage ◽

Pearson Correlation ◽

Free Field ◽

Pure Tone Audiometry ◽

Hearing Assessment

Background:Hearing loss is an invisible injury that has been viewed as an acceptable by-product of military service. It is imperative to detect hearing loss at early stage to take immediate remedial measures. In Indian armed forces the current method of assessment of hearing is primarily by Free Field Hearing which is obsolete and has numerous shortcomings. We contucted a study using free iOS application to detect hearing loss. The objectives of the study were to investigate the validity and reproducibility of app based hearing assement and free field hearing with clinical pure tone audiometer as gold standard. It is cross sectional intra-subject comparative studyMethods:The study was conducted at CHAF where 200 patients were accrued. Hearing assessment was carried out by Pure Tone Audiometry (PTA) which is gold standard. Thereafter these patients were subjected to hearing assessment by using windows application “freehearingtestsoftware.com” and by free field hearing (FFH). Results:Hearing assessment by FFH and hearing check app was compared with PTA. Hearing check app was found to be more sensitive than FFH (98% and 73%). Both modalities had high specificity (95% and 99%). The test retest reproducibility measured with Pearson correlation coefficient was high (0.99) with hearing check app.Conclusions:Smart phone application like Hearing check app is a cheap and effective way to assess hearing with reasonable accuracy. It’s high sensitivity and high test retest reproducibility makes it an ideal tool for screening and early detection of hearing loss replacing out-dated free field hearing.

Download Full-text

A Study on Effects of Diabetes Mellitus on Auditory System

Romanian Journal of Diabetes Nutrition and Metabolic Diseases ◽

10.1515/rjdnmd-2017-0006 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 24 (1) ◽

pp. 49-55

Author(s):

Kamal Deep Joshi ◽

Jeevan Ramachandra Galagali ◽

Sanajeet Kumar Singh

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Pure Tone ◽

Statistical Tests ◽

Free Field ◽

Pure Tone Audiometry ◽

Diabetic Patients ◽

Clinical Tests ◽

Auditory Dysfunction ◽

Auditory Functions

AbstractBackground and aims: Auditory dysfunctions in diabetes are known but are difficult to identify. Role of clinical tests and routine audiological tools are still to be established in early detection of diabetes-related auditory complication. The study aims to establish a link between diabetes and auditory dysfunction and assess the role of clinical examination and audiological investigations as a sensitive indicator of auditory dysfunctions in diabetics.Material and Methods: The auditory functions of 100 diabetic patients and 100 non-diabetics were assessed by clinical otological examination including free-field hearing and pure tone audiometry (PTA) in this descriptive study. The data for diabetic and non-diabetic groups and effect of age on auditory functions were analyzed with suitable statistical tests using SPSS 2.0 software with an error margin of 10%.Results: The demographical variables were comparable in both groups. The results showed a decline in free field hearing, which are furthur adversely affected by duration of diabetes and patient’s age. Overall pure tone thresholds were not significantly higher in diabetics, however the thresholds were higher in diabetics in older age groups. The hearing loss appears at an early age in diabetics but gradually becomes indistinguishable from age-related hearing loss.Conclusions: The auditory dysfunction can be linked to diabetes. It is usually not detectable at earliest stages with routine clinical and audiological tests but the clinical tests and pure tone audiometry can have a utility in monitoring the auditory dysfunction.

Download Full-text

Screening for Hearing Impairment in Older Adults by Smartphone-Based Audiometry, Self-Perception, HHIE Screening Questionnaire, and Free-Field Voice Test: Comparative Evaluation of the Screening Accuracy With Standard Pure-Tone Audiometry

JMIR mhealth and uhealth ◽

10.2196/17213 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (10) ◽

pp. e17213

Author(s):

Lok Yee Joyce Li ◽

Shin-Yi Wang ◽

Cheng-Jung Wu ◽

Cheng-Yu Tsai ◽

Te-Fang Wu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Older Adults ◽

Hearing Loss ◽

Hearing Impairment ◽

Pure Tone ◽

Free Field ◽

Pure Tone Audiometry ◽

High Sensitivity ◽

High Specificity ◽

The Self ◽

Self Perception

Background Hearing impairment is the most frequent sensory deficit in humans, affecting more than 360 million people worldwide. In fact, hearing impairment is not merely a health problem, but it also has a great impact on the educational performance, economic income, and quality of life. Hearing impairment is therefore an important social concern. Objective We aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of self-perception, Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly-Screening (HHIE-S) questionnaire, free-field voice test, and smartphone-based audiometry as tests for screening moderate hearing impairment in older adults in China. Methods In this study, 41 patients were recruited through a single otology practice. All patients were older than 65 years. Patients with otorrhea and cognitive impairment were excluded. Moderate hearing impairment was defined as mean hearing thresholds at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz >40 dB hearing loss (pure-tone average > 40 dB hearing loss). All patients completed 5 hearing tests, namely, the self-perception test, HHIE-S questionnaire test, free-field voice test, smartphone-based audiometry test, and standard pure-tone audiometry by the same audiologist. We compared the results of these tests to the standard audiogram in the better-hearing ear. Results The sensitivity and the specificity of the self-perception test were 0.58 (95% CI 0.29-0.84) and 0.34 (95% CI 0.19-0.54), respectively. The sensitivity and the specificity of the HHIE-S questionnaire test were 0.67 (95% CI 0.35-0.89) and 0.31 (95% CI 0.316-0.51), respectively. The sensitivity and the specificity of the free-field voice test were 0.83 (95% CI 0.51-0.97) and 0.41 (95% CI 0.24-0.61), respectively. The sensitivity and the specificity of the smartphone-based audiometry test were 0.92 (95% CI 0.60-0.99) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.56-0.89), respectively. Smartphone-based audiometry correctly diagnosed the presence of hearing loss with high sensitivity and high specificity. Conclusions Smartphone-based audiometry may be a dependable screening test to rule out moderate hearing impairment in the older population.

Download Full-text