McGregor Kara D, Flamme Gregory A, Tasko Stephen M, Deiters Kristy K, Ahroon William A, Themann Christa L, Murphy William J
a Department of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences , Western Michigan University , Kalamazoo , MI , USA.
b West Coast Office , Stephenson and Stephenson Research and Consulting, LLC , Forest Grove , OR , USA.
Int J Audiol. 2018 Feb;57(sup1):S42-S50. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2017.1416189. Epub 2017 Dec 19.
The objective of this study is to determine whether acoustic reflexes are pervasive (i.e. known with 95% confidence to be observed in at least 95% of people) by examining the frequency of occurrence using a friction-fit diagnostic middle ear analyser.
Adult participants with very good hearing sensitivity underwent audiometric and middle ear testing. Acoustic reflexes were tested ipsilaterally and contralaterally in both ears across a range of elicitor frequencies. Reflex elicitors were 700 ms tones presented at maximum level of 100 dB HL. Two automated methods were used to detect the presence of an acoustic reflex.
A group of 285 adult volunteers with normal hearing.
There were no conditions in which the proportion of participants exhibiting acoustic reflexes was high enough to be deemed pervasive. Ipsilateral reflexes were more likely to be observed than contralateral reflexes and reflexes were more common at 0.5 and 1 kHz elicitor frequencies as compared with 2 and 4 kHz elicitor frequencies.
Acoustic reflexes are common among individuals with good hearing. However, acoustic reflexes are not pervasive and should not be included in damage risk criteria and health hazard assessments for impulsive noise.
本研究的目的是通过使用摩擦式诊断中耳分析仪检查发生频率,来确定声反射是否普遍存在(即有95%的把握确定至少95%的人会出现)。
听力敏感度非常好的成年参与者接受了听力测定和中耳测试。在一系列诱发频率下,对双耳进行同侧和对侧的声反射测试。反射诱发刺激为100 dB HL最大声级下呈现的700 ms纯音。使用两种自动方法来检测声反射的存在。
一组285名听力正常的成年志愿者。
没有任何情况下表现出声反射的参与者比例高到足以被视为普遍存在。同侧反射比双侧反射更易观察到,并且与2 kHz和4 kHz诱发频率相比,在0.5 kHz和1 kHz诱发频率下反射更常见。
声反射在听力良好的个体中很常见。然而,声反射并不普遍,不应纳入脉冲噪声的损伤风险标准和健康危害评估中。