Literature DB >> 15599194

New version of the TEN test with calibrations in dB HL.

Brian C J Moore1, Brian R Glasberg, Michael A Stone.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop a new version of the threshold-equalizing-noise (TEN) test for the diagnosis of dead regions, with levels calibrated in dB HL rather than dB SPL, and with levels corresponding to the dial readings on the audiometer.
DESIGN: The spectral shape of the noise required to give equal masked thresholds at all frequencies, when expressed in dB HL, was derived by two calculation methods and by empirical measurements of the electrical output of audiometers using TDH50 earphones and TDH39 earphones. To reduce the loudness of the noise and to minimize distortion generated in the audiometer and/or earphone, the noise was bandlimited between 354 and 6500 Hz. In addition, the noise was synthesized using a method that leads to a low crest factor (ratio of peak to root-mean-square value). This further reduced audiometer/earphone distortion and allowed higher levels per ERBN; ERBN is the equivalent rectangular bandwidth of the auditory filter at 1 kHz, as determined in young, normally hearing subjects. The test tone frequencies were limited to the range 500 to 4000 Hz. Subjects with normal or near-normal hearing were tested by using a noise level of 60 dB HL/ERBN to assess whether the noise did lead to equal masked thresholds in dB HL for all audiometric frequencies from 500 to 4000 Hz. Thresholds in the TEN were measured by means of manual audiometry with a 2 dB final step size.
RESULTS: The mean masked thresholds were almost constant across frequency when expressed in dB HL and were within 0.5 dB of the noise level per ERBN. For a single noise level, the test takes approximately 5 minutes per ear to administer.
CONCLUSIONS: The new TEN test has the following advantages over the original version (which used levels calibrated in dB SPL): (1) All levels are expressed in dB HL. Thus, absolute thresholds only need to be measured once. (2) Calibration is such that both the noise level/ERBN and the test tone levels correspond to the values indicated on the audiometer. This makes the test simpler to apply and reduces the likelihood of errors. (3) The noise bandwidth is restricted, and the noise has a low crest factor. This allows the noise level/ERBN to be increased while avoiding distortion, excessive loudness, and possible further damage to hearing.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15599194     DOI: 10.1097/01.aud.0000145992.31135.89

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  30 in total

1.  Survey of Current Practice in the Fitting and Fine-Tuning of Common Signal-Processing Features in Hearing Aids for Adults.

Authors:  Melinda C Anderson; Kathryn H Arehart; Pamela E Souza
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.664

Review 2.  The Use of Frequency Lowering Technology in the Treatment of Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss: A Review of the Literature and Candidacy Considerations for Clinical Application.

Authors:  Danielle Glista; Susan Scollie
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2018-10-26

3.  [Effect of frequency compression in hearing aids on speech intelligibility and subjective sound quality].

Authors:  M Leifholz; S Margolf-Hackl; S Kreikemeier; J Kiessling
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 4.  Current audiological diagnostics.

Authors:  Sebastian Hoth; Izet Baljić
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2017-12-18

5.  Implications of high-frequency cochlear dead regions for fitting hearing aids to adults with mild to moderately severe hearing loss.

Authors:  Robyn M Cox; Jani A Johnson; Genevieve C Alexander
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Voiced initial consonant perception deficits in older listeners with hearing loss and good and poor word recognition.

Authors:  Susan L Phillips; Scott J Richter; David McPherson
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  Bimodal cochlear implants: the role of acoustic signal level in determining speech perception benefit.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Philip Loizou; Shuai Wang; Ting Zhang; Anthony Spahr; Louise Loiselle; Sarah Cook
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 1.854

8.  Factors affecting outcomes on the TEN (SPL) test in adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Benjamin W Y Hornsby; J Andrew Dundas
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Using Thresholds in Noise to Identify Hidden Hearing Loss in Humans.

Authors:  Courtney L Ridley; Judy G Kopun; Stephen T Neely; Michael P Gorga; Daniel M Rasetshwane
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression: clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Danielle Glista; Susan Scollie; Marlene Bagatto; Richard Seewald; Vijay Parsa; Andrew Johnson
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.