CoDAS · 2022
Influence of the type of acoustic transducer in pure-tone audiometry.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Born Nathália Montandon, Marciano Mariane da Silva, Mass Stephanie da Costa, Silva Daniela Polo Camargo da, Scharlach Renata Coelho
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the air-conduction hearing thresholds obtained with different acoustic transducers and verify the users' preferences regarding them.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, analytical, observational study with 26 participants aged 18 to 30 years, with normal hearing and no history of exposure to high sound pressure levels or complaints of tinnitus at the time of the assessment. We surveyed their medical history and performed meatoscopy, pure-tone threshold audiometry, speech audiometry, and acoustic immittance. The auditory thresholds were surveyed twice, each time with a different type of acoustic transducer: insert (E-A-RTONE) and circumaural earphones (HDA200). The assessments were performed in a random order, with 5-minute intervals. In the end, we asked the participants which earphones they found more comfortable in the tests. The data were submitted to nonparametric statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Assessing the medians in the auditory threshold survey, the circumaural earphones obtained better results at 250, 500, 2000, and 6000 Hz, while the insert earphones were better at 3000 and 4000 Hz; there were no statistical differences at 1000 and 8000 Hz. The circumaural was elected the most comfortable earphone.
CONCLUSION: The circumaural earphones had better auditory thresholds at 250, 500, 2000, and 6000 Hz than the insert earphones and were reported by the patients as the most comfortable type of transducer.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, analytical, observational study with 26 participants aged 18 to 30 years, with normal hearing and no history of exposure to high sound pressure levels or complaints of tinnitus at the time of the assessment. We surveyed their medical history and performed meatoscopy, pure-tone threshold audiometry, speech audiometry, and acoustic immittance. The auditory thresholds were surveyed twice, each time with a different type of acoustic transducer: insert (E-A-RTONE) and circumaural earphones (HDA200). The assessments were performed in a random order, with 5-minute intervals. In the end, we asked the participants which earphones they found more comfortable in the tests. The data were submitted to nonparametric statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Assessing the medians in the auditory threshold survey, the circumaural earphones obtained better results at 250, 500, 2000, and 6000 Hz, while the insert earphones were better at 3000 and 4000 Hz; there were no statistical differences at 1000 and 8000 Hz. The circumaural was elected the most comfortable earphone.
CONCLUSION: The circumaural earphones had better auditory thresholds at 250, 500, 2000, and 6000 Hz than the insert earphones and were reported by the patients as the most comfortable type of transducer.