Over the past few decades, advances in mobile device technology have enabled many
of the core audiology tests to be delivered through smart phones or tablet computers.
The integration of mobile computing devices into the healthcare environment has resulted
in an innovative shift in where and how audiology services can be delivered. The backbone
of audiology is, of course, the pure-tone audiogram and speech-recognition testing.
Since the 1920s, audiometers used for the diagnostic audiometric evaluation have been
largely anchored in audiology clinics where they are utilized in sound attenuated
booths. For the purposes of audiometric assessment, there are now a number of companies
and research facilities that have developed and marketed software applications built
on mobile device platforms. These apps coupled with new headphone technology that
allows calibration and sound-attenuation equivalent to a traditional sound-booth are
now being used to change traditional audiology practice. What is at question is how
do these new forms of technology capable of performing audiometry compare to conventional
audiometric testing done in booth and with a traditional audiometer.
In this issue of JAAA, Bornman and colleagues report on the test-retest reliability of extended high frequency
(8–12 KhZ) audiometry using a smartphone application. This capability is especially
useful for patients being monitored for ototoxicity. Patients undergoing chemotherapy
or those being treated with intravenous antibiotics are, in most instances, being
seen by multiple specialists to treat their condition. In many instances, patients
will have an appointment coordinator to arrange all of their appointments as close
together as they can so they can spend as little time in the hospital as possible.
The ability to provide hearing monitoring without having to transport the patient
to a different department lessens the burden on this fragile population. The investigators
report that there was no significant difference between their smartphone application
and headphone system when compared to conventional high frequency audiometry. This
is encouraging news not only for those patients that are being treated with ototoxic
medications but also for those individuals who work in areas with high noise levels.
This exciting technology also has promise for monitoring hearing in occupational settings.
There is no question that mobile device testing is here and it is reliable. What remains
is how to leverage this technology to first, improve our profession’s ability to identify
those who need our services and second, provide accurate and sensitive monitoring
of hearing.
Devin L. McCaslin, Ph.D.
Deputy Editor-in-Chief
