Literature DB >> 19927697

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

Benjamin W Y Hornsby1, J Andrew Dundas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent work using the Threshold Equalizing Noise (TEN) test as a gold standard suggests that the presence of cochlear dead regions in persons with moderate-to-severe hearing loss may be quite common. In addition, previous data suggest that certain characteristics of hearing loss, such as severe-profound high-frequency hearing loss or steeply sloping configurations may be more commonly associated with positive TEN findings. These findings, however, are based largely on studies including a relatively small number of participants and/or participants that were included based on specific audiometric criteria (e.g., the presence of severe high-frequency hearing loss). Likewise, results from many of these studies are limited to the frequency regions of 500-4000 Hz. There has been less work that has systematically evaluated the relationship between audiometric characteristics and TEN test findings, particularly in the frequency regions above 4000 Hz, on a large number of individuals with a wide range of hearing losses and hearing loss configurations.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to further examine the effects of audiometric characteristics such as degree and slope of hearing loss on the rate of positive, negative, and inconclusive findings on the TEN test over a wide frequency range (250-8000 Hz). Given that the functional impact of positive findings (i.e., findings suggestive of a dead region) may vary with the extent of potential damage, we were also interested in determining the relative occurrence of "patchy" versus contiguous positive findings on the TEN. RESEARCH
DESIGN: Fifty-nine adults (117 ears) with a wide range of SNHL participated. To examine results over a wide frequency range (250-8000 Hz), the TEN (SPL), rather than the TEN (HL), was utilized. Thresholds, in both ears, were measured in quiet and in the TEN (SPL). Results were categorized as positive (suggestive of a dead region), negative (not suggestive of a dead region), or inconclusive.
RESULTS: Consistent with past research, positive TEN (SPL) results were more common when hearing losses exceeded 60 dB HL; however, there was not a systematic increase in positive results with increases in threshold. In contrast to previous work, however, positive test results among individuals with milder hearing losses (< 60 dB HL) were not uncommon, suggesting a potential for false positive results. In regard to audiometric slope, also consistent with past research, slope of hearing loss was an inadequate predictor of TEN (SPL) results. Negative results (not suggestive of a dead region) were less common in participants with steeply sloping losses while positive test findings were unaffected by hearing loss slope. Although a large proportion of participants had positive results on the TEN (SPL), for most participants, these positive findings occurred in isolated (i.e., one or two frequencies) rather than in contiguous frequency regions.
CONCLUSIONS: The relatively large number of inconclusive results and the potential for false positive results makes interpreting the functional impact of TEN (SPL) results difficult, particularly when positive results are in the high (> 4000 Hz) frequencies. In addition, although a large proportion (84%) of study participants had positive findings on the TEN (SPL), the functional impact of these findings is not clear as, in the majority of cases, positive findings occurred at only one or two test frequencies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19927697      PMCID: PMC2784649          DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.20.4.5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  32 in total

Review 1.  Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea.

Authors:  L Robles; M A Ruggero
Journal:  Physiol Rev       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 37.312

2.  Effects of low-pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies.

Authors:  D A Vickers; B C Moore; T Baer
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Efficacy of 3 commonly used hearing aid circuits: A crossover trial. NIDCD/VA Hearing Aid Clinical Trial Group.

Authors:  V D Larson; D W Williams; W G Henderson; L E Luethke; L B Beck; D Noffsinger; R H Wilson; R A Dobie; G B Haskell; G W Bratt; J E Shanks; P Stelmachowicz; G A Studebaker; A E Boysen; A Donahue; R Canalis; S A Fausti; B Z Rappaport
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-10-11       Impact factor: 56.272

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

Authors:  Brian C J Moore; Brian R Glasberg; Michael A Stone
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Reassessment of cochlear dead regions in hearing-impaired teenagers with severe-to-profound hearing loss.

Authors:  Kevin J Munro; Catherine Felthouse; Brian C J Moore; Sarosh Kapadia
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.117

6.  Low-frequency hearing loss: perception of filtered speech, psychophysical tuning curves, and masking.

Authors:  A R Thornton; P J Abbas; P J Abbas
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1980-02       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Dead regions in the cochlea: diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing AIDS.

Authors:  B C Moore
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2001-03

8.  Speech perception in gated noise: the effects of temporal resolution.

Authors:  Su-Hyun Jin; Peggy B Nelson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Speech recognition as a function of high-pass filter cutoff frequency for people with and without low-frequency cochlear dead regions.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Ten(HL)-test results and psychophysical tuning curves for subjects with auditory neuropathy.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.117

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults with Severe and Profound Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Laura Turton; Pamela Souza; Linda Thibodeau; Louise Hickson; René Gifford; Judith Bird; Maren Stropahl; Lorraine Gailey; Bernadette Fulton; Nerina Scarinci; Katie Ekberg; Barbra Timmer
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2020-12-16

2.  Effects of degree and configuration of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to bilateral speech understanding.

Authors:  Benjamin W Y Hornsby; Earl E Johnson; Erin Picou
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Cochlear dead regions in typical hearing aid candidates: prevalence and implications for use of high-frequency speech cues.

Authors:  Robyn M Cox; Genevieve C Alexander; Jani Johnson; Izel Rivera
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Clinical Application of the Threshold Equalizing Noise Test in Patients with Hearing Loss of Various Etiologies: A Preliminary Study.

Authors:  Ho Yun Lee; Yu Mi Seo; Kyung Ae Kim; Yeon Shin Kang; Chin Saeng Cho
Journal:  J Audiol Otol       Date:  2015-04-17
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.