MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this repeated-measures study, 40 Malaysian adults (aged 19-26 years) with normal hearing bilaterally (based on PTA results) were enrolled. They then underwent the SAL test based on the recommended protocol by Jerger and Tillman (1960). The SAL normative data for each ear were obtained by calculating the differences between air conduction (AC) thresholds in quiet and AC thresholds in noise by means of insert earphone, B71 and B81 bone vibrators.
RESULTS: The SAL normative values were comparable between the ears (p > 0.05), and the data were pooled for subsequent analyses (n = 80 ears). Relative to B81 bone transducer, B71 bone vibrator produced statistically higher SAL normative data at all frequencies (p < 0.05). The SAL normative values established by the present study were statistically lower than those of the previous study (that utilised headphones) at most of frequencies tested (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The SAL normative data produced by the two bone vibrators were significantly different. The SAL normative values were also affected by the type of earphone used. While conducting the SAL test on Malaysian patients, the information provided by this study can be useful to guide the respective clinicians in choosing the appropriate normative data.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eleven normal-hearing adults participated. The ABR test was repeated twice in the same clinical session and conducted again in another session. The ABR was acquired using both the click and LS CE-Chirp® stimuli at 4 presentation levels (80, 60, 40, and 20 dBnHL). Only the right ear was tested using the ipsilateral electrode montage. The reliability of the ABR findings (amplitudes and latencies) to the click and LS CE-Chirp® stimuli within the same clinical session and between the two clinical sessions was calculated using an intra-class correlation coefficient analysis (ICC).
RESULTS: The results showed a significant correlation of the ABR findings (amplitude and latencies) to both stimuli within the same session and between the clinical sessions. The ICC values ranged from moderate to excellent.
CONCLUSIONS: The ABR results from both the LS CE-Chirp® and click stimuli were consistent and reliable over the two clinical sessions suggesting that both stimuli can be used for neurological diagnoses with the same reliability.
DESIGN: Part 1 involved electroacoustic measurement and biological calibration of a laptop-earphone pair used for the computer-based audiometry (CBA). Part 2 compared CBA thresholds obtained without a sound booth with those measured using the gold-standard clinical audiometry.
STUDY SAMPLE: 17 young normal-hearing volunteers (Part 1) and 43 normal and hearing loss subjects (Part 2) recruited from an audiology clinic via convenience sampling.
RESULTS: The transducer-device combination produced outputs suitable for measuring thresholds down to 0 dB HL. Threshold pairs obtained from the CBA and clinical audiometry were highly correlated (Spearman's correlation coefficient, ρ = 0.92, p 25 dB HL.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of a computer-based audiometer application with consumer insert phone-earmuff combination can offer a cost-effective solution for boothless screening audiometry.
METHODS: FS measures at 1 and 4 kHz center frequencies were obtained using a custom-made software in normal-hearing (NH), slight SNHL and mild-to-moderate SNHL subjects. For comparison, subjects were also assessed with the Malay Digit Triplet Test (DTT) and the shortened Malay Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) questionnaire.
RESULTS: Compared to DTT and SSQ, the FS measure at 4 kHz was able to distinguish NH from slight and mild-to-moderate SNHL subjects, and was strongly correlated with their thresholds in quiet determined separately in 1-dB step sizes at the similar test frequency. Further analysis with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves indicated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.77 and 0.83 for the FS measure at 4 kHz when PTA thresholds of NH subjects were taken as ≤ 15 dB HL and ≤ 20 dB HL, respectively. At the optimal FS cut-off point for 4 kHz, the FS measure had 77.8% sensitivity and 86.7% specificity to detect 20 dB HL hearing loss.
CONCLUSION: FS measure was superior to DTT and SSQ questionnaire in detecting early frequency-specific threshold shifts in SNHL subjects, particularly at 4 kHz. This method could be used for screening subjects at risk of noise-induced hearing loss.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relative contributions of auditory functioning and cognition status to speech recognition in quiet and in noise.
METHODS: We measured speech recognition in quiet and in composite noise using the Malay Hearing in noise test on 72 native Malay speakers (60-82 years) older adults with normal to mild hearing loss. Auditory function included pure tone audiogram, gaps-in-noise, and dichotic digit tests. Cognitive function was assessed using the Malay Montreal cognitive assessment.
RESULTS: Linear regression analyses using backward elimination technique revealed that had the better ear four frequency average (0.5-4kHz) (4FA), high frequency average and Malay Montreal cognitive assessment attributed to speech perception in quiet (total r2=0.499). On the other hand, high frequency average, Malay Montreal cognitive assessment and dichotic digit tests contributed significantly to speech recognition in noise (total r2=0.307). Whereas the better ear high frequency average primarily measured the speech recognition in quiet, the speech recognition in noise was mainly measured by cognitive function.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the fact that besides hearing sensitivity, cognition plays an important role in speech recognition ability among older adults, especially in noisy environments. Therefore, in addition to hearing aids, rehabilitation, which trains cognition, may have a role in improving speech recognition in noise ability of older adults.
METHODS: The prospective clinical study was conducted at Selayang Hospital (SH) and Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz (HCTM) within one year. A total of 38 children ranging from 3 to 18 years old underwent hearing evaluation using ABR tests and MSSR under sedation. The duration of both tests were then compared.
RESULTS: The estimated hearing threshold of frequency specific chirp MSSR showed good correlation with ABR especially in higher frequencies such as 2000 Hz and 4000Hz with the value of cronbach alpha of 0.890, 0.933, 0.970 and 0.969 on 500Hz, 1000Hz, 2000Hz and 4000Hz. The sensitivity of MSSR is 0.786, 0.75, 0.957 and 0.889 and specificity is 0.85, 0.882, 0.979 and 0.966 over 500Hz, 1000Hz, 2000Hz and 4000Hz. The duration of MSSR tests were shorter than ABR tests in normal hearing children with an average of 35.3 minutes for MSSR tests and 46.4 minutes for ABR tests. This can also be seen in children with hearing loss where the average duration for MSSR tests is 40.0 minutes and 52.0 minutes for ABR tests.
CONCLUSION: MSSR showed good correlation and reliability in comparison with ABR especially on higher frequencies. Hence, MSSR is a good clinical test to diagnose children with hearing loss.