-
Ear, Nose, & Throat Journal Jun 2021This study explores the changes in hearing thresholds in pregnancy. (Observational Study)
Observational Study
PURPOSE
This study explores the changes in hearing thresholds in pregnancy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A prospective hospital-based observational study was performed with a total of 69 patients in the age-group of 18 to 40 years. Patients underwent hearing assessment twice during the study period. Conventional pure tone audiometry and impedance audiometry were performed, first during the antepartum period (28-32 weeks of gestational age) and second time during the postpartum period (6 weeks postpartum).
RESULTS
Significant difference was seen between the average of air conduction threshold values at speech frequencies when antepartum values were compared with postpartum values.
CONCLUSION
The alterations in hearing sensitivity in pregnant females which improved during the postpartum period can be attributed to pregnancy.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Audiometry; Auditory Threshold; Female; Hearing; Hearing Loss; Humans; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimester, Third; Prospective Studies; Young Adult
PubMed: 31565981
DOI: 10.1177/0145561319871240 -
F1000Research 2021: The objective of this study was to test the validity of automated audiometry as a method of hearing examination in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. :...
: The objective of this study was to test the validity of automated audiometry as a method of hearing examination in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. : This was a cross-sectional comparative study with a retrospective approach, using patient medical records. Patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) were recruited based-on medical records that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria at the Pulmonology outpatient unit, then referred to the Otorhinolaryngology outpatient unit of the Dr. Soetomo Academic Medical Center. The subjects' hearing function was measured with two different devices (automated audiometer and conventional audiometer) before being given anti-tuberculosis drug therapy (aminoglycoside injection) as ototoxicity monitoring from July to December 2019 period. Sensitivity and specificity analysis was used to assess the validity of the test. : A total of 36 patients (72 ears) were included. The comparison test results using the Mann-Whitney test showed that there were significant differences between automated audiometry and conventional audiometry in both ears. Analysis values were: sensitivity 80-97%, specificity 37-96%, positive predictive value 74-98%, and negative predictive value 59-96%. : Automated audiometry is valid for use as a method of hearing examination and monitoring in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
Topics: Aminoglycosides; Antitubercular Agents; Audiometry; Cross-Sectional Studies; Hearing; Hearing Loss; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant
PubMed: 36127887
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.75090.2 -
Ear and Hearing 2020When one ear of an individual can hear significantly better than the other ear, evaluating the worse ear with loud probe tones may require delivering masking noise to...
OBJECTIVES
When one ear of an individual can hear significantly better than the other ear, evaluating the worse ear with loud probe tones may require delivering masking noise to the better ear to prevent the probe tones from inadvertently being heard by the better ear. Current masking protocols are confusing, laborious, and time consuming. Adding a standardized masking protocol to an active machine learning audiogram procedure could potentially alleviate all of these drawbacks by dynamically adapting the masking as needed for each individual. The goal of this study is to determine the accuracy and efficiency of automated machine learning masking for obtaining true hearing thresholds.
DESIGN
Dynamically masked automated audiograms were collected for 29 participants between the ages of 21 and 83 (mean 43, SD 20) with a wide range of hearing abilities. Normal-hearing listeners were given unmasked and masked machine learning audiogram tests. Listeners with hearing loss were given a standard audiogram test by an audiologist, with masking stimuli added as clinically determined, followed by a masked machine learning audiogram test. The hearing thresholds estimated for each pair of techniques were compared at standard audiogram frequencies (i.e., 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8 kHz).
RESULTS
Masked and unmasked machine learning audiogram threshold estimates matched each other well in normal-hearing listeners, with a mean absolute difference between threshold estimates of 3.4 dB. Masked machine learning audiogram thresholds also matched well the thresholds determined by a conventional masking procedure, with a mean absolute difference between threshold estimates for listeners with low asymmetry and high asymmetry between the ears, respectively, of 4.9 and 2.6 dB. Notably, out of 6200 masked machine learning audiogram tone deliveries for this study, no instances of tones detected by the nontest ear were documented. The machine learning methods were also generally faster than the manual methods, and for some listeners, substantially so.
CONCLUSIONS
Dynamically masked audiograms achieve accurate true threshold estimates and reduce test time compared with current clinical masking procedures. Dynamic masking is a compelling alternative to the methods currently used to evaluate individuals with highly asymmetric hearing, yet can also be used effectively and efficiently for anyone.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Audiometry; Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Auditory Threshold; Hearing; Hearing Loss; Humans; Machine Learning; Middle Aged; Perceptual Masking; Young Adult
PubMed: 33136643
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000891 -
European Archives of... Jun 2024To evaluate the effect of piston diameter in patients undergoing primary stapes surgery on audiometric results and postoperative complications.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of piston diameter in patients undergoing primary stapes surgery on audiometric results and postoperative complications.
METHODS
A retrospective single-center cohort study was performed. Adult patients who underwent primary stapes surgery between January 2013 and April 2022 and received a 0.4-mm-diameter piston or a 0.6-mm-diameter piston were included. The primary and secondary outcomes were pre- and postoperative pure-tone audiometry, pre- and postoperative speech audiometry, postoperative complications, intraoperative anatomical difficulties, and the need for revision stapes surgery. The pure-tone audiometry included air conduction, bone conduction, and air-bone gap averaged over 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 kHz.
RESULTS
In total, 280 otosclerosis patients who underwent 321 primary stapes surgeries were included. The audiometric outcomes were significantly better in the 0.6 mm group compared to the 0.4 mm group in terms of gain in air conduction (median = 24 and 20 dB, respectively), postoperative air-bone gap (median = 7.5 and 9.4 dB, respectively), gain in air-bone gap (median = 20.0 and 18.1 dB, respectively), air-bone gap closure to 10 dB or less (75% and 59%, respectively) and 100% speech reception (median = 75 and 80 dB, respectively). We found no statistically significant difference in postoperative dizziness, postoperative complications and the need for revision stapes surgery between the 0.4 and 0.6 mm group. The incidence of anatomical difficulties was higher in the 0.4 mm group.
CONCLUSION
The use of a 0.6-mm-diameter piston during stapes surgery seems to provide better audiometric results compared to a 0.4-mm-diameter piston, and should be the preferred piston size in otosclerosis surgery. We found no statistically significant difference in postoperative complications between the 0.4- and 0.6-mm-diameter piston. Based on the results, we recommend always using a 0.6-mm-diameter piston during primary stapes surgery unless anatomical difficulties do not allow it.
Topics: Humans; Stapes Surgery; Retrospective Studies; Male; Otosclerosis; Female; Middle Aged; Adult; Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Postoperative Complications; Bone Conduction; Treatment Outcome; Ossicular Prosthesis; Aged; Prosthesis Design; Reoperation; Audiometry, Speech
PubMed: 38273045
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-023-08407-w -
PloS One 2023The study aimed to evaluate the effect of systemic cisplatin administration on off-frequency masking audiometry.
OBJECTIVE
The study aimed to evaluate the effect of systemic cisplatin administration on off-frequency masking audiometry.
METHODS
Among 26 patients receiving systemic cisplatin, 48 ears were included in the analysis. All patients underwent pure-tone audiometry with ipsilateral narrow-band masking noise (off-frequency masking audiometry). In the off-frequency masking audiometry, 70 dBHL band-pass noise (center frequency 1000 Hz, 1/3 octave bandwidth) was administered to the tested ear. The acquired thresholds were compared to those of standard pure-tone audiometry, and threshold elevations greater than 10 dB were regarded as significant. The number of patients showing abnormal threshold elevation was compared between before and after the cisplatin administration.
RESULTS
Before cisplatin administration, 91.7, 93.8, 97.9, and 93.8% of ears showed normal off-frequency masking audiometry outcomes at 125, 250, 6000, and 8000 Hz, respectively. After cisplatin administration, a higher number of patients showed abnormal off-frequency masking audiometry outcomes. This change was more prominent with increasing doses of cisplatin. After the cisplatin administration of 100∼200 mg/m2, the prevalence of patients with normal off-frequency masking audiometry outcomes was 77.3, 70.5, 90.9, and 88.6% at 125, 250, 6000, and 8000 Hz, respectively. At 250 Hz, the change was statistically significant (p = 0.01, chi-squared test).
Topics: Humans; Cisplatin; Auditory Threshold; Perceptual Masking; Audiometry; Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Noise
PubMed: 37410731
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287400 -
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology 2014Auditory steady-state responses (ASSR) are an important tool to detect objectively frequency-specific hearing thresholds. Pure-tone audiometry is the gold-standard for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
INTRODUCTION
Auditory steady-state responses (ASSR) are an important tool to detect objectively frequency-specific hearing thresholds. Pure-tone audiometry is the gold-standard for hearing evaluation, although sometimes it may be inconclusive, especially in children and uncooperative adults.
AIM
Compare pure tone thresholds (PT) with ASSR thresholds in normal hearing subjects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this prospective cross-sectional study we included 26 adults (n = 52 ears) of both genders, without any hearing complaints or otologic diseases and normal puretone thresholds. All subjects had clinical history, otomicroscopy, audiometry and immitance measurements. This evaluation was followed by the ASSR test. The mean pure-tone and ASSR thresholds for each frequency were calculated.
RESULTS
The mean difference between PTand ASSR thresholdswas 7,12 for 500 Hz, 7,6 for 1000 Hz, 8,27 for 2000 Hz and 9,71 dB for 4000 Hz. There were no difference between PT and ASSR means at either frequency.
CONCLUSION
ASSR thresholds were comparable to pure-tone thresholds in normal hearing adults. Nevertheless it should not be used as the only method of hearing evaluation.
Topics: Acoustic Stimulation; Adolescent; Adult; Audiometry, Evoked Response; Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Auditory Threshold; Cross-Sectional Studies; Evoked Potentials, Auditory; Female; Humans; Male; Prospective Studies; Reference Values; Young Adult
PubMed: 24626890
DOI: 10.5935/1808-8694.20140009 -
International Journal of Environmental... May 2021Identifying and treating hearing loss can help improve communication skills, which often leads to improved quality of life. Many people do not seek medical treatment...
BACKGROUND
Identifying and treating hearing loss can help improve communication skills, which often leads to improved quality of life. Many people do not seek medical treatment and, therefore, go undiagnosed for an extended period before realizing they have hearing loss. This study presents a self-administered, low-cost, smartphone-based hearing test application (HearTest) to quantify the pure-tone hearing thresholds of a user. The HearTest application can be used with commercially available smartphone devices and an earphone with the mentioned specification.
METHODS
Air-conduction-based pure-tone audiometry for the smartphone application was designed and implemented to detect hearing thresholds using a traditional "10 dB down and 5 dB up" approach. Employed smartphone-earphone combination was calibrated with respect to a GSI-61 audiometer and insert earphone ER-3A to maintain clinical standards with the help of subjective testing on 20 normal-hearing (NH) participants.
RESULTS
Further subjective testing on 14 participants with NH and retesting on five participants showed that HearTest achieves high-accuracy audiogram within clinically acceptable limits (≤10 dB HL mean difference) when compared with the reference clinical audiometer. Hardware challenges and limitations in air-conduction-based hearing tests through smartphones and ways to improve their accuracy and reliability are discussed.
CONCLUSION
The proposed smartphone application provides a simple, affordable, and reliable means for people to learn more about their hearing health without needing access to a formal clinical facility.
Topics: Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Auditory Threshold; Humans; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Smartphone
PubMed: 34064080
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18115529 -
Ear and HearingSingle-ear hearing measurements, such as better-ear, worse-ear or left/right ear, are often used as outcomes in auditory research, yet, measurements in the two ears of...
OBJECTIVE
Single-ear hearing measurements, such as better-ear, worse-ear or left/right ear, are often used as outcomes in auditory research, yet, measurements in the two ears of the same individual are often strongly but not perfectly correlated. We propose a both-ear method using the Generalized Estimating Equation approach for analysis of correlated binary ear data to evaluate determinants of ear-specific outcomes that includes information from both ears of the same individual.
DESIGN
We first theoretically evaluated bias in odds ratio (OR) estimates based on worse-ear and better-ear hearing outcomes. A simulation study was conducted to compare the finite sample performances of single-ear and both-ear methods in logistic regression models. As an illustrative example, the single-ear and both-ear methods were applied to estimate the association of Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension adherence scores with hearing threshold elevation among 3135 women, aged 48 to 68 years, in the Nurses' Health Study II.
RESULTS
Based on statistical theories, the worse-ear and better-ear methods could bias the OR estimates. The simulation results led to the same conclusion. In addition, the simulation results showed that the both-ear method had satisfactory finite sample performance and was more efficient than the single-ear method. In the illustrative example, the confidence intervals of the estimated ORs for the association of Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension scores and hearing threshold elevation using the both-ear method were narrower, indicating greater precision, than for those obtained using the other methods.
CONCLUSIONS
The worse-ear and better-ear methods may lead to biased estimates, and the left/right ear method typically results in less-efficient estimates. In certain settings, the both-ear method using the Generalized Estimating Equation approach for analyses of audiometric data may be preferable to the single-ear methods.
Topics: Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Auditory Threshold; Female; Hearing; Humans
PubMed: 35302530
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001216 -
The South African Journal of... Mar 2020Noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) is a major contributor to disabling hearing loss. Engineering controls are superior to hearing protection devices (HPDs) in prevention... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) is a major contributor to disabling hearing loss. Engineering controls are superior to hearing protection devices (HPDs) in prevention of occupational noise induced hearing loss (ONIHL), although the latter are more commonly used. Effective use of audiometry requires quick categorization of audiograms. The UK Health and Safety Executive (UKHSE) scheme for the categorization of audiograms is a tool that accomplishes this.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this paper is to provide an overview of the classification of audiograms and build a case for the preferential use of the UKHSE's scheme to achieve this.
METHOD
The author provides a literature review of methods of classification for audiograms and uses a case study in a Tanzanian mining company to demonstrate how the UKHSE scheme was successfully used to enhance the existing hearing protection program.
RESULTS
The literature review identified several methods of classification based on a variation of threshold shifts from baseline. The difference was in the frequency and level of threshold shift used to determine hearing loss, and the recommended course of action once hearing loss is detected. The UKHSE scheme is simple and provides guidance on steps to be taken thereafter. This was demonstrated in a case study among miners in a mining company in Tanzania.
CONCLUSION
The UKHSE audiogram classification scheme has the advantage of providing a straightforward, easy to determine classification that allows for intervention appropriate to the findings.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Audiometry; Female; Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Miners; Noise, Occupational; Organizational Case Studies; Tanzania; Young Adult
PubMed: 32129662
DOI: 10.4102/sajcd.v67i2.691 -
Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica :... Feb 2020
Topics: Adult; Aged; Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Audiometry, Speech; Diagnostic Screening Programs; Female; Hearing; Hearing Tests; Humans; Italy; Male; Middle Aged; Noise; Regression Analysis; Sensitivity and Specificity; Surveys and Questionnaires; Volunteers
PubMed: 30933172
DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-1929