Pellett F S, Cox L C, MacDonald C B
Department of Otolaryngology, Boston University School of Medicine, Massachusetts, USA.
J Am Acad Audiol. 1997 Jun;8(3):181-7.
The purpose of the present investigation was to compare the performance of the acoustic otoscope/DPU-411 printer and acoustic immittance with otoscopic examinations by a physician for the detection of middle ear effusion (MEE). Three hundred and two patients (11 months to 69 years) were evaluated with the acoustic otoscope, acoustic immittance, and otoscopic examinations. The patients were divided into two age groups for data analysis: 1 to 12 years (children) and 13 to 69 years (adults). Reflectivity and angle data were evaluated at different cut-off points and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were determined. The variables were analyzed in different combinations for each study group. Sensitivity and specificity were poorest for the acoustic otoscope in children. Furthermore, acoustic immittance data compared more favorably with otoscopy than did the acoustic otoscope for all ages.
本研究的目的是比较声学耳镜/DPU - 411打印机和声导抗检查与医生耳镜检查在检测中耳积液(MEE)方面的表现。对302例患者(年龄从11个月至69岁)进行了声学耳镜、声导抗检查和耳镜检查评估。将患者分为两个年龄组进行数据分析:1至12岁(儿童)和13至69岁(成人)。在不同的截止点评估反射率和角度数据,并确定受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线。对每个研究组的变量进行不同组合分析。声学耳镜在儿童中的敏感性和特异性最差。此外,在所有年龄段中,声导抗数据与耳镜检查相比,比声学耳镜的数据更具优势。