000			02899naa a22002057a 4500
003			OSt
005			20150130122434.0
008			150130b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_cNational Acoustic Laboratory
100			_aDURISALA, NARESH
245			_aIn-situ audiometry: How close is it to conventional audiometry?
520	3		_aTechnology in the hearing aid industry is ever changing. One of the many features that may improve accuracy of hearing aid fi ttings and patients ’ satisfaction is the inception of in-situ audiometry, which allows the clinician to measure hearing thresholds with a hearing aid in the patient ’ s ear. Objective : The present study aimed to investigate the validity of in-situ audiometry measured with a behind-the-ear hearing aid coupled to a customized earmould relative to conventional thresholds measured using supra-aural head phones . Study design : A total of 24 ears from 15 participants with varying degrees of sensorineural hearing loss ranging from moderate to severe, were selected for the study. Pure tone hearing thresholds and real-ear-to-dial-differences were measured for both conventional and in-situ thresholds across 250 Hz to 6 kHz. Results : Slight but signifi cant mean differences ( p 0.05, paired t -test) of 3.2 and 3.4dB between conventional and in-situ thresholds at 2000 and 6000 Hz were found before adding REDD corrections with in-situ thresholds yielding better (lower) thresholds. Except at 250 Hz in dB HL, individual threshold variability between conventional and in-situ threshold measurements was within or equal to 10dB for 95% of ears before and after adding REDD corrections. Large interparticipant variation in measured ear canal SPL was noticed at 250, 500, 4000 and 6000 Hz when measured in-situ compared to headphones, which was attributed to differences in earmould vent sizes provided for different degrees of hearing loss at the low frequencies and probe placement in the high frequencies. Conclusion: Overall in-situ audiometry proved to be valid especially in individuals with symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss. Although there are statistically signifi cant differences, they are within clinically accepted standards. Furthermore, thresholds measured in ear canal SPL will be more comparable as any changes in hearing threshold levels in either of the measurements will be refl ected by an inverse change in measured ear canal SPL during REDD measurements.
650			_asensorineural , ,
650			_a, hearing loss _9720
650			_ahearing aid
650			_a real-ear-to-dial-difference
773	0		_g 2015; Early Online: 1–7 _tHearing, Balance and Communication,
856			_uhttp://dspace.nal.gov.au/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/101/In-situ%20audiometry%20How%20close%20is%20it%20to%20conventional%20audiometry.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
942			_2udc _cJOURNALS
999			_c2375 _d2375