AJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

American Journal of Audiology Vol.10 41-49 June 2001. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2000/006)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tharpe, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by Rothpletz, A. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tharpe, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by Rothpletz, A. M.

Practical Considerations of Real-Ear-to-Coupler Difference Measures in Infants

Anne Marie Tharpe 1, Douglas Sladen 1, Holly M. Huta 1, and Ann McKinley Rothpletz 1

1 Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center for Otolaryngology and Communication Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN

tharpeam{at}ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu

The purpose of this study was to investigate some of the practical issues surrounding the use of the real-ear-to-coupler difference (RECD) measure in infants in clinical settings. Twenty-two newborns were seen once a month during their first year of life for the purpose of obtaining RECD measurements. Two methods for obtaining the RECD were examined: the commonly used constant insertion depth method and the acoustic method. Differences between the results of the two methods were examined as well as test-retest reliability for each. Findings suggest that no compelling evidence exists to support the use of one of these methods over the other. Use of either method resulted in good test-retest reliability in the midfrequency range of the RECD, with poorer reliability on both ends of the frequency spectrum. Test-retest reliability decreased with increasing age for both methods. In addition, reliability of between-ear RECD values was examined. Between-ear measurements were most reliable in the midfrequency range, and reliability decreased slightly with increasing age.

Key Words: real-ear-to-coupler difference, infant hearing, hearing aid fitting

Submitted on March 6, 2001
Accepted on June 2, 2001




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 TRENDS AMPLIFHome page
M. Bagatto, S. Moodie, S. Scollie, R. Seewald, S. Moodie, J. Pumford, and K. P. R. Liu
Clinical Protocols for Hearing Instrument Fitting in the Desired Sensation Level Method
Trends in Amplification, December 1, 2005; 9(4): 199 - 226.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.