Epstein A, Shoenut B, Sills J A
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1978 Mar-Apr;87(2 Pt 1):260-5. doi: 10.1177/000348947808700220.
Choice of the earmold for a particular individual is perhaps the most subjective of all decisions made by clinicians in hearing aid fitting. The four earmold designs used in this study were standard-long, standard-short, belled-vented, and cavernous. Conslusions were: 1) performance differences in earmolds of contrasting design can be assessed by discrimination scores with monosyllabic word lists of equal difficulty; 2) among the physical measures taken of the earmold-receiver systems, frequency-response overall range (HAIC) ranked the devices in agreement with group responses to a word identification task; and 3) these data offer a basis for endorsement of the standard-long and cavernous-short earmold types over the other two with their superiority evident in each of the discrimination categories of excellent, good, and poor.
为特定个体选择耳模可能是临床医生在助听器验配过程中做出的所有决策中最具主观性的。本研究中使用的四种耳模设计分别是标准长款、标准短款、喇叭形通气款和海绵款。结论如下:1)通过使用难度相同的单音节词表进行辨别分数评估,可以评估不同设计的耳模在性能上的差异;2)在对耳模-受话器系统进行的物理测量中,频率响应总范围(HAIC)对设备的排名与群体对单词识别任务的反应一致;3)这些数据为认可标准长款和海绵短款耳模类型优于其他两种耳模类型提供了依据,在优秀、良好和差的各个辨别类别中,其优势都很明显。