Literature DB >> 23076435

[Evaluation of the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test in background noise].

J Löhler1, B Akcicek, M Pilnik, K Saager-Post, S Dazert, S Biedron, J Oeken, D Mürbe, J Löbert, R Laszig, T Wesarg, C Langer, S Plontke, T Rahne, U Machate, R Noppeney, K Schultz, P Plinkert, S Hoth, M Praetorius, P Schlattmann, E F Meister, H W Pau, K Ehrt, R Hagen, W Shehata-Dieler, M Cebulla, L E Walther, A Ernst.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Freiburg speech test has been the gold standard in speech audiometry in Germany for many years. Previously, however, this test had not been evaluated in assessing the effectiveness of a hearing aid in background noise. Furthermore, the validity of particular word lists used in the test has been questioned repeatedly in the past, due to a suspected higher variation within these lists as compared to the other word list used. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, two groups of subjects [normal hearing control subjects and patients with SNHL (sensorineural hearing loss) that had been fitted with hearing aid] were examined. In a first group, 113 control subjects with normal age- and gender-related pure tone thresholds were assessed by means of the Freiburg monosyllabic test under free-field conditions at 65 dB. The second group comprised 104 patients that had been fitted with hearing aids at least 3 months previously to treat their SNHL. Members of the SNHL group were assessed by means of the Freiburg monosyllabic test both with and without hearing aids, and in the presence or absence of background noise (CCITT-noise; 65/60 dB signal-noise ratio, in accordance with the Comité Consultatif International Téléphonique et Télégraphique), under free-field conditions at 65 dB.
RESULTS: The first (control) group exhibited no gender-related differences in the Freiburg test results. In a few instances, inter-individual variability of responses was observed, although the reasons for this remain to be clarified. Within the second (patient) group, the Freiburg test results under the four different measurement conditions differed significantly from each other (p>0.05). This group exhibited a high degree of inter-individual variability between responses. In light of this, no significant differences in outcome could be assigned to the different word lists employed in the Freiburg speech test.
CONCLUSION: The Freiburg monosyllabic test is able to assess the extent of hearing loss, as well as the effectiveness of a fitted hearing aid, in the presence or absence of background-noise (CCITT-noise). The present study could not evidence statistically significant differences in outcome when using the different word lists in this test battery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23076435     DOI: 10.1007/s00106-012-2598-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HNO        ISSN: 0017-6192            Impact factor:   1.284


  1 in total

1.  [Speech audiometry and new word-tests].

Authors:  K H HAHLBROCK
Journal:  Arch Ohren Nasen Kehlkopfheilkd       Date:  1953
  1 in total
  16 in total

1.  [The age effect in evaluation of hearing aid benefits by speech audiometry].

Authors:  A Müller; T Hocke; U Hoppe; P Mir-Salim
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  [The Freiburg monosyllable word test in postoperative cochlear implant diagnostics].

Authors:  M Hey; G Brademann; P Ambrosch
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  [The adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic test in noise : Development of a procedure and comparison of the results with the Oldenburg sentence test].

Authors:  T Memmeler; R Schönweiler; B Wollenberg; J Löhler
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  [Implementation of the new quality assurance agreement for the fitting of hearing aids in daily practice. Part 2: New diagnostic aspects of speech audiometry].

Authors:  J Löhler; B Akcicek; B Wollenberg; R Schönweiler
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  [Influence of hearing aids on monosyllabic test score and subjective everyday hearing].

Authors:  R Thümmler; T Liebscher; U Hoppe
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

6.  [The Freiburg monosyllabic test put to the test].

Authors:  I Baljić; U Hoppe
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

7.  [Evaluation of the perceptual equivalence of test lists in the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test].

Authors:  I Baljić; A Winkler; T Schmidt; I Holube
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 8.  [The Freiburg speech intelligibility test : A pillar of speech audiometry in German-speaking countries].

Authors:  S Hoth
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 9.  [Use of Freiburg monosyllabic test words in the contemporary German language : Currentness of the test words].

Authors:  T Steffens
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

10.  Speech audiometry and data logging in CI patients : Implications for adequate test levels.

Authors:  M Hey; T Hocke; P Ambrosch
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.284

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.