American Journal of Audiology Vol.21 106-119 June 2012. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2012/11-0012)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schlauch, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Carney, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schlauch, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Carney, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Challenge of Detecting Minimal Hearing Loss in Audiometric Surveys

Robert S. Schlaucha and Edward Carneya

a University of Minnesota, Minneapolis

Correspondence to Robert S. Schlauch: schla001{at}umn.edu

Purpose: This tutorial provides framework and context for understanding the complex interaction of hearing measurement methodology and cohort social factors, as well as their relation to approaches to data interpretation and identification of minimal hearing loss (HL) in audiometric surveys.

Method: Pertinent archival studies were reviewed, and an original analysis on U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) audiometric survey data from children (ages 6–19) was performed.

Conclusion: The definition of an otologically normal individual, the pass–fail criterion representing the upper limit of the range of normal hearing, and the quality of the audiometry affect the percentage of persons who are falsely identified as having a minimal HL. An upper limit of normal hearing of 15 dB HL yields an unacceptably high false-positive rate, particularly when the more variable higher audiometric frequencies are examined. When air-conduction thresholds are assessed in isolation to estimate potential noise damage, the failure to exclude persons who have possible middle and external ear problems, including earwax, results in high false-positive rates. When these factors and other limitations are considered, audiograms from teens from a recent CDC survey do not show evidence consistent with widespread noise-induced HL. Suggestions are made to improve the effectiveness of pure-tone audiometry and the identification of minimal HL.

Key Words: pure-tone air conduction thresholds, audiograms, health surveys, audiometric zero


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?