A comparison of test–retest variability and time efficiency of auditory thresholds measured with pure tone audiometry and new early warning test. (1st April 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Vinay, ; Svensson, U. Peter; Kvaløy, Olav; Berg, Tone
• Is Part Of: Applied acoustics. Volume 90(2015)
• Page Start: 153
• Page End: 159
• Publication Date: 2015-04-01
• Subjects: NEWT -- Quietpro -- Test–retest variability -- Time efficiency; Acoustical engineering -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 620.2
• DOI: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2014.11.002
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-682X

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: The present study measured test–retest variability and time efficiency of an automated hearing assessment method called 'new early warning test (NEWT)' incorporated inside a quietpro® hearing protection device (HPD). Study design: Test–retest thresholds were obtained with manual pure tone audiometry (PTA) and automated NEWT method. Also, test duration was recorded for PTA and NEWT method. Thirty-two participants having normal hearing in one or both ears were tested with PTA and NEWT at 1, 3, 4 and 6 kHz. Each measurement was repeated to determine test–retest variability and measurement time was recorded. Results: Test–retest variability for NEWT method was not significantly different from PTA except at 3 kHz ( p < 0.05). Recording time for NEWT method was significantly lower ( p < 0.001) compared to PTA. Test–retest difference for PTA trials was ⩽5 dB in 82% at 1 and 6 kHz; 85% at 3 kHz and 80% at 4 kHz. For NEWT trials, test–retest difference was ⩽5 dB in 95% at 1 kHz; 72% at 3 and 6 kHz and 77% at 4 kHz. Conclusions: The NEWT automated method could serve as a reliable and an efficient method to measure auditory thresholds especially in the presence of high background noise.