Test-retest reliability of wideband reflectance measures in infants under screening and diagnostic test conditions
- PMID: 17804981
- DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31812f71b1
Test-retest reliability of wideband reflectance measures in infants under screening and diagnostic test conditions
Abstract
Objective: The main goal of this study was to examine the test-retest reliability of wideband reflectance (WBR) measures collected from infants in screening and diagnostic hearing test environments. In addition, the results of WBR testing for infants who passed and failed otoacoustic emission (OAE) screening were examined to determine whether these measures distinguished between the two groups.
Design: Repeated WBR measures were collected from two groups of infants, one group tested in an outpatient hearing screening setting and the other group in a diagnostic test setting. For a total of 127 infants and a control group of 10 adults, repeated WBR measurements were made with the probe left in place between the two tests (T1 and T2) and after reinsertion of the probe (T3) for a total of 3 measurements. Test-retest differences were calculated for each individual across one-third octave frequency bands, and the mean and 90th percentile were calculated by subject group and OAE results. WBR patterns were also compared between infants who passed versus failed OAE screening.
Results: Mean test-retest differences were smaller for the diagnostic group than for the screening group. Test-retest differences were largest for the reinsertion condition and for the frequencies below 500 Hz. While the low frequencies were variable, the test-retest differences were smallest in the mid-frequency range which is thought to be the frequency range most sensitive to middle ear dysfunction. Test-retest performance did not differ between infants who passed or failed OAE screening. However, infants who failed OAE screening had significantly higher WBR in the range from 630 to 2000 Hz than infants who passed OAE screening.
Conclusions: Test-retest performance was poor for frequencies below 500 Hz, but in general test-retest differences were small across the important mid-frequency range. Reinsertion of the probe between repeated tests yielded larger and more variable test-retest differences. Careful monitoring of probe fit and testing while infants are in a quiet state appears to be critical for obtaining reliable WBR results. Analysis of WBR results indicated significantly higher reflected energy in the mid-frequency range for infants who failed OAE screening than for those who passed OAE screening. Although conclusions are limited by the fact that the true status of the middle ear and cochlea were not known for the infants in this study, this result may indicate that a number of these infants failed OAE screening due to transient or permanent middle ear dysfunction which was detected by WBR.
Similar articles
-
A multicenter evaluation of how many infants with permanent hearing loss pass a two-stage otoacoustic emissions/automated auditory brainstem response newborn hearing screening protocol.Pediatrics. 2005 Sep;116(3):663-72. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1688. Pediatrics. 2005. PMID: 16140706
-
Changes in transient-evoked otoacoustic emission levels with negative tympanometric peak pressure in infants and toddlers.Ear Hear. 2008 Aug;29(4):533-42. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181731e3e. Ear Hear. 2008. PMID: 18469719
-
Test-retest reliability of the acoustic stapedial reflex test in healthy neonates.Ear Hear. 2009 Jun;30(3):295-301. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31819c3ea0. Ear Hear. 2009. PMID: 19322092 Clinical Trial.
-
[A new method for detecting congenital hearing disorders. Infants are screened by measuring otoacoustic emissions].Lakartidningen. 1999 Mar 10;96(10):1166-8. Lakartidningen. 1999. PMID: 10193119 Review. Swedish.
-
[Otoacoustic emissions. A futuristic objective hearing test].Fortschr Med. 1993 Oct 20;111(29):453-6. Fortschr Med. 1993. PMID: 8258421 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Factors that introduce intrasubject variability into ear-canal absorbance measurements.Ear Hear. 2013 Jul;34 Suppl 1(7 0 1):60S-64S. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31829cfd64. Ear Hear. 2013. PMID: 23900183 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Air-leak effects on ear-canal acoustic absorbance.Ear Hear. 2015 Jan;36(1):155-63. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000077. Ear Hear. 2015. PMID: 25170779 Free PMC article.
-
Wideband absorbance tympanometry using pressure sweeps: system development and results on adults with normal hearing.J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Dec;124(6):3708-19. doi: 10.1121/1.3001712. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008. PMID: 19206798 Free PMC article.
-
Controlled exploration of the effects of conductive hearing loss on wideband acoustic immittance in human cadaveric preparations.Hear Res. 2016 Nov;341:19-30. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2016.07.018. Epub 2016 Aug 3. Hear Res. 2016. PMID: 27496538 Free PMC article.
-
The Rise and Fall of Aural Acoustic Immittance Assessment Tools.Semin Hear. 2023 Mar 14;44(1):5-16. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1764139. eCollection 2023 Feb. Semin Hear. 2023. PMID: 36925655 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical