Interpretation of pure-tone thresholds in sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL): A review of measurement variability and age-specific references

Acta Oto-Rhino-Laryngologica Belgica

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 341-352

  Lemkens, N ^a   Vermeire, K ^a   Brokx, J P L ^b   Fransen, E ^c   Van Camp, G ^c   Van De Heyning, P H ^a  

^a ANTWERP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Age factors; Audiometry, pure tone; Epidemiology; Reference values

Indexed keywords

AGE; AUDIOMETRY; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CONFERENCE PAPER; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; HUMAN; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; REFERENCE VALUE; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; SEX DIFFERENCE;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 0037021730     PISSN: 00016497     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. Humes L. E. Psychoacoustic considerations in clinical audiology. In: Katz J., ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, Maryland: 56-72, 1994.
2. Lutman M. E. Diagnostic audiometry. In: Stephens D., ed. Adult Audiology. Butterworth-Heinemenn, Oxford: 12/1-12/31, 1997.
3. Robinette M. S. Integrating audiometric results. In: Katz J., ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, Maryland: 181-194, 1994.
4. ISO. Acoustics - Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, ISO 389, 1999.
5. American National Standards Institute. American National Standard Specifications for Audiometers. New York: American National Standards Institute, ANSI S3.6, 1996.
6. American National Standards Institute. Standard Reference for the Calibration of Pure-Tone Bone-Conduction Audiometers. New York: American National Standards Institute, ANSI 3.43, 1992.
7. Lutman M. E., Cane M. A., Smith P. A. Comparison of manual and computer-controlled self-recorded audiometric methods for serial monitoring of hearing. Br. J. Audiol., 23: 305-315, 1989.
8. ISO. Acoustics: Audiometric Test Methods. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, ISO 8253, 1989.
9. American National Standards Institute. Method for Manual Puretone Threshold Audiometry. New York: American National Standards Institute, ANSI S3.21, 1997.
10. American National Standards Institute. Maximum Permissable Ambient Noise for Audiometric Testing. New York: American National Standards Institute, ANSI S3.6, 1991.
11. Weissler P. G. International standard reference zero for audiometers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 44: 264-275, 1968.
12. Lutman M. E., Davis A. C. The distribution of hearing threshold levels in the general population aged 18-30 years. Audiology, 33: 327-350, 1994.
13. Leijon A. Quantization error in clinical pure-tone audiometry. Scand. Audiol., 21: 103-108, 1992.
14. Dobie R. A. Reliability and validity of industrial audiometry: Implications for hearing conservation program design. Laryngoscope, 93: 906-927, 1983.
15. Atherley G. R. C., Dingwall-Fordyce I. The reliability of repeated auditory threshold determination. Br. J. Ind. Med., 20: 231-235, 1963.
16. Robinson D. W. Long-term repeatability of the pure-tone hearing threshold and its relation to noise exposure. Br. J. Audiol., 25: 219-235, 1991.
17. Jerlvall L., Dryselius H., Arlinger S. Comparison of manual and computer-controlled audiometry using identical procedures. Scand. Audiol., 12: 209-213, 1983.
18. Robinson D. W., Shipton M. S. A standard determination of paired air- and bone-conduction thresholds under different masking noise conditions. Audiology, 21: 61-82, 1982.
19. Coles R. R., Lutman M. E., Robinson D. W. The limited accuracy of bone-conduction audiometry: Its significance in medicolegal assessments. J. Laryngol. Otol., 105: 518-521, 1991.
20. Pearson J. D., Morrell C. H., Gordon-Salant S., Brant L. J., Metter E. J., Klein L. L., Fozard J. L. Gender differences in a longitudinal study of age-associated hearing loss. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 97: 1196-1205, 1995.
21. ISO. Acoustics - Statistical Distribution of Hearing Thresholds as a Function of Age. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, ISO 7029, 2000.
22. Moscicki E. K., Elkins E. F., Baum H. M., McNamara P. M. Hearing loss in the elderly: An epidemiologic study of the Framingham Heart Study Cohort. Ear Hear, 6: 184-190, 1985.
23. Gates G. A., Cooper J. C. Jr., Kannel W. B., Miller N. J. Hearing in the elderly: The Framingham cohort, 1983-1985. Part I. Basic audiometric test results. Ear Hear., 11: 247-256, 1990.
24. Gates G. A., Cooper J. C. Incidence of hearing decline in the elderly. Acta Otolaryngol., 111: 240-248, 1991.
25. Gordon-Salant S., Fitzgibbons P. J. Selected cognitive factors and speech recognition performance among young and elderly listeners. J. Speech Lang Hear.Res., 40: 423-431, 1997.
26. Cooper J. C. Jr. Health and Nutrition Examination Survey of 1971-75: Part I. Ear and race effects in hearing. J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 5: 30-36, 1994.
27. Davis A., ed. Hearing in Adults. Whurr Publishers Ltd, London, 1995.
28. Parving A., Newton V. Guidelines for description of inherited hearing loss. Journal of audiological medicine, 4: ii-iii, 1995.
29. Liu X., Xu L. Nonsyndromic hearing loss: An analysis of audiograms. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol., 103: 428-433, 1994.
30. Meema S., Meema H. E. Evaluation of cortical bone mass, thickness and density by z-scores in osteopenic conditions and in relation to menopause and estrogen treatment. Skeletal Radiol., 8: 259-268, 1982.
31. Cryns K., Pfister M., Pennings R. J., Bom S. J., Flothmann K., Caethoven G., Kremer H., Schatteman I., Koln K. A., Toth T., Kupka S., Blin N., Nurnberg P., Thiele H., Van De Heyning P. H., Reardon W., Stephens D., Cremers C. W., Smith R. J., Van Camp G. Mutations in the WFS1 gene that cause low-frequency sensorineural hearing loss are small non-inactivating mutations. Hum. Genet., 110: 389-394, 2002.
32. Verstreken M., Declau F., Schatteman I., van Velzen D., Verhoeven K., Van Camp G., Willems, P. J., Kuhweide E. W., Verhaert E., D'Haese P., Wuyts F. L., Van De Heyning P. H. Audiometric analysis of a Belgian family linked to the DFNA10 locus. Am. J. Otol., 21: 675-681, 2000.
33. Govaerts P. J., De Ceulaer G., Daemers K., Verhoeven K., Van Camp G., Schatteman I., Verstreken M., Willems P. J., Somers T., Offeciers F. E. A new autosomal-dominant locus (DFNA12) is responsible for a nonsyndromic, midfrequency, prelingual and nonprogressive sensorineural hearing loss. Am. J. Otol., 19: 718-723, 1998.
34. Wuyts F. L., Van De Heyning P. H., Declau F. Audiometric criteria for linkage analysis in genetic hearing impairment. In: Stephens D., Read A., Martini A., eds. Developments in Genetic Hearing Impairment. Whurr Publishers Ltd, London: 54-59, 1998.