[The adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic test in noise : Development of a procedure and comparison of the results with the Oldenburg sentence test].
Die adaptive Messung des Freiburger Einsilbertests im Störschall : Entwicklung einer Messmethode und Vergleich der Ergebnisse mit dem Oldenburger Satztest.
Adaptive procedure
Freiburg monosyllabic speech test
Oldenburg sentence test
Speech audiometry
Speech discrimination test
Journal
HNO
ISSN: 1433-0458
Titre abrégé: HNO
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 2985099R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
7
12
2018
medline:
2
7
2019
entrez:
7
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Whereas sentence tests are commonly performed using an adaptive procedure, this method has not yet been transferred to the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test, the most important word test. When using different procedures, a comparison of results between sentence and word tests is not possible. Therefore, an adaptive procedure which has proven itself in sentence tests was transferred to the Freiburg monosyllabic test in noise. The results of the new procedure were compared to the standard of sentence tests, i.e., the Oldenburg sentence test. The adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic speech test and the Oldenburg sentence test were applied in 40 otologically normal subjects in a randomized order. Results were analyzed with respect to time requirements, possible gender differences, the influence of test order, and correlation of test results. The time required for the adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic speech test was significantly higher than for the Oldenburg sentence test. No significant impact of gender or test order could be shown. The mean signal-to-noise ratio for 50% speech discrimination of the Oldenburg sentence test was significantly smaller than for the adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic speech test. No correlation could be shown between the results of the two tests CONCLUSION: The Freiburg monosyllabic test can not only be used for quantifying discrimination loss in percentage terms, but also to measure the 50% speech recognition threshold with an adaptive algorithm. However, the procedure of the adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic test is more time consuming than that of the Oldenburg sentence test. Concerning a possible missing correlation between the results for 50% speech discrimination, further studies with hearing-impaired persons are needed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Whereas sentence tests are commonly performed using an adaptive procedure, this method has not yet been transferred to the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test, the most important word test. When using different procedures, a comparison of results between sentence and word tests is not possible. Therefore, an adaptive procedure which has proven itself in sentence tests was transferred to the Freiburg monosyllabic test in noise. The results of the new procedure were compared to the standard of sentence tests, i.e., the Oldenburg sentence test.
METHODS
METHODS
The adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic speech test and the Oldenburg sentence test were applied in 40 otologically normal subjects in a randomized order. Results were analyzed with respect to time requirements, possible gender differences, the influence of test order, and correlation of test results.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The time required for the adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic speech test was significantly higher than for the Oldenburg sentence test. No significant impact of gender or test order could be shown. The mean signal-to-noise ratio for 50% speech discrimination of the Oldenburg sentence test was significantly smaller than for the adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic speech test. No correlation could be shown between the results of the two tests CONCLUSION: The Freiburg monosyllabic test can not only be used for quantifying discrimination loss in percentage terms, but also to measure the 50% speech recognition threshold with an adaptive algorithm. However, the procedure of the adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic test is more time consuming than that of the Oldenburg sentence test. Concerning a possible missing correlation between the results for 50% speech discrimination, further studies with hearing-impaired persons are needed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30519714
doi: 10.1007/s00106-018-0597-z
pii: 10.1007/s00106-018-0597-z
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
ger
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
118-125Références
Arch Ohren Nasen Kehlkopfheilkd. 1953;162(5):394-431
pubmed: 13092895
Laryngorhinootologie. 2005 Jan;84(1):20-3
pubmed: 15647974
HNO. 2006 Jun;54(6):445-50
pubmed: 16189713
HNO. 2010 Jun;58(6):595-6
pubmed: 20480125
HNO. 2010 Jun;58(6):597-604
pubmed: 20533016
HNO. 2011 Oct;59(10):1012-21
pubmed: 21769581
Laryngorhinootologie. 2012 Dec;91(12):782-8
pubmed: 22234848
HNO. 2013 Jul;61(7):586-91
pubmed: 23076435
HNO. 2014 Jan;62(1):49-53
pubmed: 24434959
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Sep;272(9):2135-42
pubmed: 24740734
Int J Audiol. 2015;54 Suppl 2:80-7
pubmed: 26364512
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2016 Jun;38:53-6
pubmed: 26953847
HNO. 2016 Aug;64(8):540-8
pubmed: 27259640
HNO. 2016 Aug;64(8):564-71
pubmed: 27286728
HNO. 2016 Aug;64(8):557-63
pubmed: 27299891
HNO. 2016 Aug;64(8):601-7
pubmed: 27393292
HNO. 2016 Aug;64(8):572-83
pubmed: 27418349
HNO. 2016 Aug;64(8):584-8
pubmed: 27435273
HNO. 2016 Aug;64(8):538-9
pubmed: 27455987
HNO. 2017 Mar;65(3):219-227
pubmed: 27742967