Department of Otolaryngology, Boys Town National Research Hospital, Omaha, Nebraska.
Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Science, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Apr;39(4):410-416. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001752.
To determine the feasibility of audiometric screening with tablet-based applications in typical clinic locations: examination room and clinic waiting area.
A randomized prospective study.
Tertiary referral center.
Participants included 107 adult patients referred for audiometric testing to assess hearing loss.
Each patient completed standard audiometry testing and one of three tablet-based audiometric applications that included pure-tone air conduction testing. The tablet-based audiometric testing was completed in a quiet examination room and a clinic waiting area using noise-cancellation headphones. A 5-question patient satisfaction survey was completed at the end of the testing.
Thresholds at each frequency were compared with those obtained from tablet-based audiometric applications in a quiet examination room and clinic waiting area. Sensitivity and specificity of each tablet-based audiogram in detecting a hearing loss at each frequency was determined.
All three tablet-based audiometric applications were user-friendly for hearing screening. However, one application was shown to be feasible and the most accurate of the three tested with 92% of thresholds within 10 dB of conventional audiometry across all test conditions. This application had a sensitivity of 96 to 100% and specificity of 72 to 85% for identifying a hearing loss in each frequency tested. Variability was noted among applications between testing in a quiet clinic room and testing in the clinic waiting area. Patients showed no preference for either conventional audiometry or the tablet-based device.
Tablet-based audiometric applications can be used to screen for hearing loss in typical clinic locations. This tool does not replace standard audiometry testing but allows for screening for hearing disorders when appropriate and in settings without access to audiometric equipment.
确定在典型临床环境（诊室和候诊区）中使用基于平板电脑的应用程序进行听力筛查的可行性。
随机前瞻性研究。
三级转诊中心。
纳入 107 例因听力损失接受听力测试的成年患者。
每位患者均完成标准听力测试和三种基于平板电脑的听力测试应用程序之一，其中包括纯音空气传导测试。基于平板电脑的听力测试在安静的诊室和候诊区使用降噪耳机进行。测试结束后，患者完成了一个包含 5 个问题的满意度调查。
每个频率的阈值与在安静的诊室和候诊区使用基于平板电脑的听力测试应用程序获得的阈值进行比较。确定每个基于平板电脑的听力图在每个频率检测听力损失的敏感性和特异性。
所有三种基于平板电脑的听力测试应用程序都便于用于听力筛查。然而，有一个应用程序被证明是可行的，也是三种测试中最准确的，在所有测试条件下，92%的阈值与传统听力测试相差 10dB 以内。该应用程序在每个测试频率下的敏感性为 96%至 100%，特异性为 72%至 85%，可识别听力损失。在安静的诊室和候诊区进行测试时，应用程序之间存在差异。患者对传统听力测试或基于平板电脑的设备没有偏好。
基于平板电脑的听力测试应用程序可用于在典型临床环境中筛查听力损失。该工具不能替代标准听力测试，但可在适当情况下在没有听力设备的环境中筛查听力障碍。
