Suppr超能文献

三种助听器验配程序的比较。

Comparison of three hearing aid prescription procedures.

作者信息

Shapiro I

出版信息

Ear Hear. 1980 Jul-Aug;1(4):211-4. doi: 10.1097/00003446-198007000-00006.

Abstract

The gain recommendations for twenty-five hearing aid condidates with sensorineural hearing loss were determined by direct measurement of most comfortable loudness level and by two different formulas which were based on air-conduction thresholds for 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. At 500 Hz, one formula recommended significantly less gain than did the other two procedures. At the other frequencies, there were no systematic, clinically significant mean differences among the three methods. However, the direct measurement of most comfortable loudness level resulted in markedly greater variability in gains as a function of hearing level than did the two formula methods. This variability suggested that wherever possible, gain should be determined by most comfortable loudness level measurement rather than by prediction from pure-tone threshold.

摘要

通过直接测量最舒适响度水平以及基于500、1000、2000和4000赫兹气导阈值的两种不同公式,确定了25名感音神经性听力损失助听器候选者的增益建议。在500赫兹时,一种公式推荐的增益明显低于其他两种方法。在其他频率上,三种方法之间没有系统性的、具有临床意义的平均差异。然而,与两种公式方法相比,直接测量最舒适响度水平导致增益随听力水平变化的变异性明显更大。这种变异性表明,只要有可能,增益应通过测量最舒适响度水平来确定,而不是通过纯音阈值预测。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验