Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2017
Determining fitting ranges of various bone conduction hearing aids.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
van Barneveld D C P B M, Kok H J W, Noten J F P, Bosman A J, Snik A F M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To define fitting ranges for nine bone conduction devices (BCDs) over different frequencies based on the device's maximum power output (MPO) and to validate the assessment of MPO of BCDs in the ear canal.
BACKGROUND: Maximum power output (MPO) is an important characteristic when fitting BCDs. It is the highest output level a device can deliver and is one of the major determinants of a device's fitting range. A skull simulator can be used to verify MPO of percutaneous BCDs. No such simulator is available for active and passive transcutaneous devices.
DESIGN: The MPO of nine different BCDs was assessed either by real-ear measurements and/or with skull simulator measurements.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: MPO and cross-validation of the methods using the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: Percutaneous BCDs have higher MPO levels compared to active and passive transcutaneous devices. This results in a wide dynamic range of hearing for percutaneous devices. Moreover, the assessment of MPO by real-ear measurements was validated.
CONCLUSION: Based on MPO data, fitting ranges were defined for nine BCDs over seven frequencies.
BACKGROUND: Maximum power output (MPO) is an important characteristic when fitting BCDs. It is the highest output level a device can deliver and is one of the major determinants of a device's fitting range. A skull simulator can be used to verify MPO of percutaneous BCDs. No such simulator is available for active and passive transcutaneous devices.
DESIGN: The MPO of nine different BCDs was assessed either by real-ear measurements and/or with skull simulator measurements.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: MPO and cross-validation of the methods using the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: Percutaneous BCDs have higher MPO levels compared to active and passive transcutaneous devices. This results in a wide dynamic range of hearing for percutaneous devices. Moreover, the assessment of MPO by real-ear measurements was validated.
CONCLUSION: Based on MPO data, fitting ranges were defined for nine BCDs over seven frequencies.