Audiologic Assessment

Abstract

Prior to the fitting of hearing aids, clinicians and patients must discuss the best treatment options for the physical and audiologic needs of the patients. To be able to confidently make these decisions, the clinician should complete a medical and audiological case history. Additionally, clinicians need accurate results from a comprehensive audiologic evaluation. The evaluation should include the following: pure-tone testing, word recognition testing, speech-in-noise testing, and loudness discomfort level measures. This article will outline the process and procedures for acquiring this information in line with the Audiology Practice Standards Organization (APSO) Guidelines for Adult Hearing Aid Fittings Standards 1 and 4. This article will also discuss how results can affect decision-making during the hearing aid selection and fitting process.

Keywords

hearing - audiologic testing - hearing aids

Publication History

Article published online:
26 July 2022

• References

• 1 Manchaiah V, Bellon-Harn ML, Dockens AL, Azios JH, Harn WE. Communication between audiologist, patient, and patient's family members during initial audiology consultation and rehabilitation planning sessions: a descriptive review. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; 30 (09) 810-819
• 2 Katz J, Chasin M, English K, Hood LJ, Tillery KL. eds. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. 7th ed.. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer; 2015
• 3 Northern JL. Strategies of adult hearing aid selection. Audiology Res 2011; 1 (01) e20
• 4 Valente M, Abrams H, Benson D. et al. Guidelines for the audiologic management of adult hearing impairment. Audiol Tod 2006; 18 (05) 1-44
• 5 Food and Drug Administration. Immediately in effect guidance document: conditions for sale for air-conduction hearing aids. Accessed August 7, 2021 at: https://www.fda.gov/media/101685/download
• 6 American Academy of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery. Position statement: red flags-warning of ear disease. Accessed August 17, 2021 at: https://www.entnet.org/resource/position-statement-red-flags-warning-of-ear-disease/
• 7 Kleindienst SJ, Zapala DA, Nielsen DW. et al. Development and initial validation of a consumer questionnaire to predict the presence of ear disease. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017; 143 (10) 983-989
• 8 Klyn NAM, Kleindienst Robler S, Alfakir R. et al. A retrospective estimate of ear disease detection using the “red flags” in a clinical sample. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (05) 1035-1038
• 9 Zapala DA, Shaughnessy K, Buckingham J, Hawkins DB. The importance of audiologic red flags in patient management decisions. J Am Acad Audiol 2008; 19 (07) 564-570
• 10 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Guidelines for manual pure-tone threshold audiometry. Accessed August 7, 2021 at: https://www.asha.org/policy/gl2005-00014/
• 11 Mineau SM, Schlauch RS. Threshold measurement for patients with tinnitus: pulsed or continuous tones. Am J Audiol 1997; 6: 52-56
• 12 American National Standards Institute. Specifications for audiometers. New York, NY: American National Standards Institute, Inc.; 2010
• 13 Mueller HG, Bentler R, Ricketts TA. Modern Hearing Aids: Pre-fitting Testing and Selection Considerations. Plural Publishing; 2013
• 14 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Determining threshold level for speech. Accessed August 7, 2021 at: https://www.asha.org/policy/gl1988-00008/
• 15 Mueller HG, Hornsby BWY. 20Q: word recognition testing – let's just agree to do it right!. Accessed on September 12, 2021 at: https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/20q-word-recognition-testing-let-26478
• 16 Taylor B. Using speech-in-noise test to make better hearing aid selection decisions. Accessed on September 12, 2021 at: https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/using-speech-in-noise-tests-832
• 17 Beck DL, Nilsson M. Speech-in-noise testing: a pragmatic addendum to hearing aid fittings. Accessed on September 12, 2021 at: https://www.hearingreview.com/hearing-products/implants-bone-conduction/cochlear-implants/speech-in-noise-testing-a-pragmatic-addendum-to-hearing-aid-fittings-2
• 18 Etymotic Research. BKB-SIN speech in noise test. Accessed September 12, 2021 at: https://www.etymotic.com/product/bkb-sin/
• 19 Bench J, Kowal A, Bamford J. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol 1979; 13 (03) 108-112
• 20 Niquette P, Arcaroli J, Revit L. et al. Development of the BKB-SIN test. Presented at: American Auditory Society annual meeting; March 2003; Scottsdale, AZ
• 21 Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95 (02) 1085-1099
• 22 Gifford RH, Shallop JK, Peterson AM. Speech recognition materials and ceiling effects: considerations for cochlear implant programs. Audiol Neurotol 2008; 13 (03) 193-205
• 23 American Academy of Audiology. Clinic practice guidelines: Cochlear implants. Accessed October 28, 2021 at: https://www.audiology.org/sites/default/files/publications/resources/CochlearImplantPracticeGuidelines.pdf
• 24 Etymotic Research. QuickSIN speech in noise test. Accessed on September 12, 2021 at: https://www.etymotic.com/product/quicksin/
• 25 Wilson RH. Development of a speech-in-multitalker-babble paradigm to assess word-recognition performance. J Am Acad Audiol 2003; 14 (09) 453-470
• 26 Wilson RH, Burks CA. Use of 35 words for evaluation of hearing loss in signal-to-babble ratio: A clinic protocol. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42 (06) 839-852
• 27 Shi LF, Doherty KA, Kordas TM, Pellegrino JT. Short-term and long-term hearing aid benefit and user satisfaction: a comparison between two fitting protocols. J Am Acad Audiol 2007; 18 (06) 482-495
• 28 Mueller HG, Bentler RA. Fitting hearing aids using clinical measures of loudness discomfort levels: an evidence-based review of effectiveness. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (07) 461-472
• 29 Sherlock LP, Formby C. Estimates of loudness, loudness discomfort, and the auditory dynamic range: normative estimates, comparison of procedures, and test-retest reliability. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (02) 85-100
• 30 Bentler RA, Cooley LJ. An examination of several characteristics that affect the prediction of OSPL90 in hearing aids. Ear Hear 2001; 22 (01) 58-64
• 31 Cox RM, Alexander GC, Taylor IM, Gray GA. The contour test of loudness perception. Ear Hear 1997; 18 (05) 388-400