Validity of Estimating the 3 kHz Audiometric Threshold by Averaging the Thresholds at 2 and 4 kHz in Cases of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss

DeJonckere Philippe Henri, Lebacq Jean
{"title":"Validity of Estimating the 3 kHz Audiometric Threshold by Averaging the Thresholds at 2 and 4 kHz in Cases of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss","authors":"DeJonckere Philippe Henri, Lebacq Jean","doi":"10.18502/aoh.v6i1.8665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Hearing thresholds at 3000 Hz are generally not measured in routine clinical audiometry. However, for purposes other than clinical diagnosis, the threshold at 3 kHz has many applications, in epidemiological studies in the field of occupational health and medicine, as well as in (medicolegal) quantification of physical impairment due to hearing loss, particularly noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). The present study addressed the validity of estimating, in the case of NIHL, the 3 kHz-audiometric thresholds by averaging the thresholds at 2 and 4 kHz. Methods: All 200 investigated subjects (400 ears) had a well-documented noise exposure, moderate to severe NIHL, and underwent, as they were claiming for compensation, a detailed medicolegal audiological investigation, including beside pure tone audiometry, electrophysiological objective frequency-specific threshold definition using cortical evoked response audiometry (CERA) and auditory steady-state response (ASSR). Results: The study results showed a good correlation between the 2-4 kHz interpolation and the actual 3 kHz threshold; the error may be around 2 dB on average. However, in individual cases, the results demonstrated that the error due to interpolation exceeds 5 dB HL in about one-quarter of the cases. This error is predictable; the larger the 2- 4 KHz difference (which reflects the steepness of the left slope of the audiometric notch), the larger the error (on either side) made by interpolating. Conclusion: For epidemiological studies with large amounts of data, the interpolated threshold (average of 2 and 4 KHz) may be considered as a valid estimate of the true value of the 3 KHz threshold. More caution is required in individual cases: the error due to interpolation exceeds 5 dB HL in about one-quarter of the cases, but this error is predictable.","PeriodicalId":32672,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Occupational Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Occupational Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/aoh.v6i1.8665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Hearing thresholds at 3000 Hz are generally not measured in routine clinical audiometry. However, for purposes other than clinical diagnosis, the threshold at 3 kHz has many applications, in epidemiological studies in the field of occupational health and medicine, as well as in (medicolegal) quantification of physical impairment due to hearing loss, particularly noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). The present study addressed the validity of estimating, in the case of NIHL, the 3 kHz-audiometric thresholds by averaging the thresholds at 2 and 4 kHz. Methods: All 200 investigated subjects (400 ears) had a well-documented noise exposure, moderate to severe NIHL, and underwent, as they were claiming for compensation, a detailed medicolegal audiological investigation, including beside pure tone audiometry, electrophysiological objective frequency-specific threshold definition using cortical evoked response audiometry (CERA) and auditory steady-state response (ASSR). Results: The study results showed a good correlation between the 2-4 kHz interpolation and the actual 3 kHz threshold; the error may be around 2 dB on average. However, in individual cases, the results demonstrated that the error due to interpolation exceeds 5 dB HL in about one-quarter of the cases. This error is predictable; the larger the 2- 4 KHz difference (which reflects the steepness of the left slope of the audiometric notch), the larger the error (on either side) made by interpolating. Conclusion: For epidemiological studies with large amounts of data, the interpolated threshold (average of 2 and 4 KHz) may be considered as a valid estimate of the true value of the 3 KHz threshold. More caution is required in individual cases: the error due to interpolation exceeds 5 dB HL in about one-quarter of the cases, but this error is predictable.
噪声性听力损失情况下通过平均2和4 kHz阈值来估计3 kHz听力阈值的有效性
背景:在常规临床测听中,通常不测量3000Hz的听力阈值。然而,出于临床诊断以外的目的,3kHz的阈值在职业健康和医学领域的流行病学研究中,以及在(法医学)量化听力损失引起的身体损伤,特别是噪声引起的听力损失(NIHL)中有许多应用。本研究探讨了在NIHL的情况下,通过平均2和4 kHz的阈值来估计3 kHz听力阈值的有效性。方法:所有200名受试者(400耳)都有充分的噪声暴露记录,中度至重度NIHL,并在要求赔偿时接受了详细的法医听力学调查,包括纯音测听,使用皮层诱发反应听力计(CERA)和听觉稳态反应(ASSR)的电生理目标频率特异性阈值定义。结果:研究结果表明,2-4kHz插值与实际3kHz阈值之间具有良好的相关性;误差可以平均在2dB左右。然而,在个别情况下,结果表明,在大约四分之一的情况下,由插值引起的误差超过5dB HL。这个错误是可以预测的;2-4千赫的差值越大(反映听力陷波左斜率的陡峭度),插值产生的误差(在两侧)就越大。结论:对于具有大量数据的流行病学研究,插值阈值(平均2和4 KHz)可以被认为是3 KHz阈值真实值的有效估计。在个别情况下需要更加小心:在大约四分之一的情况下,插值引起的误差超过5 dB HL,但这种误差是可以预测的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信