Validity and reliability of in-situ air conduction thresholds measured through hearing aids coupled to closed and open instant-fit tips

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 49, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 868-876

  O'Brien, Anna ^a   Keidser, Gitte ^a   Yeend, Ingrid ^a   Hartley, Lisa ^a   Dillon, Harvey ^a  

^a NATIONAL ACOUSTIC LABORATORIES   (Australia)

Author keywords

In situ audiometry; Insert earphones; Open fitting; Test retest reliability

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AIR; ARTICLE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BONE CONDUCTION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AIR; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BONE CONDUCTION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 78649791389     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: 17088186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2010.503664     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Bentler R.A. & Pavlovic C.V. 1989. Transfer functions and correction factors used in hearing aid evaluation and research. Ear Hear , 10(1), 58-63.
2. Bohnert A. & Brantzen P. 2004. RECD and clinical verifi cation in children. Hear Rev , 11(5), 50-52.
3. Bostock S., Reber M. & Scheller L. 2004. In-situ audiometry and open fi tting: Can venting affect test results? Audiology Insight , 2, 26-31.
4. Dillon H. 2001. Hearing Aids . Sydney: Boomerang Press, pp. 91 - 94, 126, 407.
5. Etymotic. 2003. Specifi cations for ER-3A insert earphones for audiometry . www.etymotic.com
6. Gagn é J., Seewald R.C., Zelisko D.L.C. & Hudson S.P. 1991. Procedure for defi ning the auditory area of hearing impaired adolescents with severe/profound hearing loss. I: Detection thresholds. J Speech Lang Path Audiol , 15(3), 13-20.
7. Gauthier E.A. & Rapisardi D.A. 1992. A threshold is a threshold or is it? Hear Inst , 43(3), 26-27.
8. Hawkins D.B., Cooper W.A. & Thompson D.J. 1990. Comparisons among SPLs in real ears 2-cm 3 couplers and 6-cm 3 couplers. J Am Acad Audiol , 1, 154-161.
9. Hoover B.M., Stelmachowicz P.G. & Lewis D.E. 2000. Effect of earmold fi t on predicted real ear SPL using a real ear to coupler difference procedure. Ear Hear , 21(4), 31-17.
10. International Standard. 1994. Acoustics - Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment - Part 2: Reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for pure tones and insert earphones. ISO 389-2.
11. 1994(E). Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. International Standard. 1989. Acoustics - Audiometric test methods - Part 1: Basic pure tone air and bone conduction thresholds audiometry. ISO 8253-1.
12. 1989(E). Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
13. Jerlvall L. & Arlinger S. 1986. A comparison of 2-dB and 5-dB step size in pure-tone audiometry. Scand Audiol , 15, 51-56.
14. Kiessling J. 1987. In-situ audiometry (ISA): A new frontier in hearing aid selection. 1987. Hear Inst 38(1), 28-29.
15. Kiessling J., Brenner B., Jespersen C.T., Groth J. & Jensen O.D. 2006. Occlusion effect of earmolds with different venting systems. J Am Acad Audiol , 16, 237-249.
16. Ludvigsen C. & Topholm J. 1997. Fitting a wide range compression hearing instrument using real ear threshold data: A new strategy. High Performance Hearing Solutions , 2, 37-39.
17. Liu T. & Chen Y. 2000. Aging and the external ear response. Audiol , 39, 235-237.
18. Mueller H.G. & Ricketts T.A. 2006. Open-canal fi ttings: Ten take-home tips. Hear J , 59(11), 24-39.
19. Munro K.J. & Davis J. 2003. Deriving the real-ear SPL of audiometric data using the coupler to dial difference and the real to coupler difference . Ear Hear , 24(2), 100-109.
20. Munro K.J. & Lazenby A. 2001. Use of the real-ear to dial difference to derive real-ear SPL from hearing level obtained with insert earphones. Br J Audiol , 35, 297-306.
21. Munro K.J. & Salisbury V.A. 2002. Is the real-ear to coupler difference independent of the measurement earphone? Int J Audiol , 41, 408-413.
22. Revit L. 1997. The circle of decibels: Relating the hearing test, to the hearing instrument, to real ear response. Hear Rev , 14(5), 35-38.
23. Saunders G.H. & Morgan D.E. 2003. Impact on hearing aid targets of measuring thresholds in dB HL versus dB SPL. Int J Audiol , 42, 319-326.
24. Schmuziger N., Probst R. & Smurzynski J. 2004. Test-retest reliability of pure-tone thresholds from 0.5 to 16 kHz using Sennheiser HDA 200 and Etymotic Research ER-2 headphones. Ear Hear , 25(2), 127-32.
25. Scollie S.D., Seewald R.C., Cornelisse L.E. & Jenstad L.M. 1998. Validity and repeatability of level-independent HL to SPL transforms. Ear Hear , 407-413.
26. Smith-Olinde L., Nicholson N., Chivers C. & Highly P. 2006. Test-retest reliability of in-situ unaided thresholds in adults. Am J Audiol , 15, 75-80.
27. Valente M., Potts L.G. & Valente M. 1997. Differences and intersubject variability of loudness discomfort levels measured in sound pressure level and hearing level for TDH-509P and ER-3A earphones. J Am Acad Audiol , 8, 59-67.
28. Valente M., Potts L.G., Valente M., Vass W. & Goebel J. 1994. Intersubject variability of real-ear sound pressure level: Conventional and insert earphones. J Am Acad Audiol , 5, 390-398.
29. Winter M. & Kuk F. 1998. Using a DSP instrument fi tting protocol for pediatric cases. Hear Rev , 15(11), 27, 71-73.
30. Yanz J., Pisa J.F.D. & Olson L. 2007. Integrated REM: real-ear measurement from a hearing aid. Hear Rev , 14(5), 44-51.