两种基于贝凯西描记法预测耳蜗病变方法的比较。

Comparison of two methods to predict cochlear pathology from Békésy tracings.

作者信息

Byers V W, Granitz D W

出版信息

Audiology. 1976 May-Jun;15(3):222-7. doi: 10.3109/00206097609071779.

DOI:10.3109/00206097609071779

Abstract

Two different methods for classifying cochlear pathology were applied to 62 BEKESY AUDIOGRAMS obtained from cochlear pathology subjects to determine which method was the better indicator of cochlear pathology. The two methods compared were: (1) Jerger's type II, which is based upon the difference (D) between the client's threshold for the interrupted-tone tracing and the threshold for the continuous-tone tracing; and (2) Bilger's Wc, which is the swing width of the continuous tone tracing for 4,000 Hz. Results indicated that D classified 62% of the audiograms (39) correctly, and Wc classified 52% of the audiograms (32) correctly. Both measures jointly classified 37% of the audiograms (23) correctly and jointly missed 23% of the audiograms (14). Statistical analysis showed no difference between the two methods in classifying cochlear pathology.

摘要

两种不同的耳蜗病变分类方法应用于从患有耳蜗病变的受试者处获得的62份贝凯西听力图，以确定哪种方法是耳蜗病变的更好指标。所比较的两种方法为：（1）耶格氏II型，其基于受试者对间断音描记的阈值与连续音描记的阈值之间的差值（D）；（2）比尔格氏Wc，即4000Hz连续音描记的摆动宽度。结果表明，D正确分类了62%的听力图（39份），Wc正确分类了52%的听力图（32份）。两种测量方法联合正确分类了37%的听力图（23份），联合漏诊了23%的听力图（14份）。统计分析表明，两种方法在耳蜗病变分类方面没有差异。