راستی آزمایی بر اساس کوپلر: مروری بر راه حل پیشنهادی جهت حل مشکل عدم تطابق بین RECDها با استفاده از روش اتصالی یکسان

نوع مقاله: مقاله مروری

نویسندگان

1 کمیته پژوهشی دانشجویان، دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، شنوایی‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم توانبخشی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار گروه شنوایی شناسی، دانشکده علوم توانبخشی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه و اهداف
با ارزیابی گوش واقعی می­توان علاوه بر تنظیم دقیق سمعک، مراجعه مکرر بیماران به کلینیک­های شنوایی­شناسی را کاهش داده و در نتیجه در وقت و انرژی نیز صرفه­جویی کرد. در حال حاضر ارزیابی­های گوش واقعی به دو صورت کلی در کلینیک­ها انجام می­شود: 1. راستی­آزمایی گوش واقعی 2. راستی­آزمایی بر اساس کوپلر. در مقاله مروری حاضر تمرکز بر مبحث راستی­آزمایی بر اساس کوپلر خواهد بود. از آنجا که آزمون بررسی تفاوت بین کوپلر و گوش واقعی یکی از اجزای اصلی راستی­آزمایی بر اساس کوپلر می­باشد، بنابراین در مقاله مروری حاضر تلاش بر این است که بر اساس استاندارد جدید مؤسسه استانداردهای ملی آمریکا نقش این آزمون در تجویز سمعک را بازگو کرده و سپس با استفاده از روش پیشنهادی، چالش به وجود آمده در این مسیر برطرف شود.
مواد و روش­ ها
با جستجو در منابعی که از سال 1980 تا 2017 میلادی در زمینه راستی­آزمایی راستی سمعک بر اساس کوپلر منتشر گردیده، 45 مقاله مرتبط از بانک­های اطلاعاتیGoogleScholar ، Proquest،Pubmed ، Sciencedirectبا کلیدواژه­های Hearing Aid Verification،Real Ear to Coupler Difference، RITE Hearing Aids، Hearing Aids Couplingانتخاب شد که از این مقالات، 35 مقاله پژوهشی برگزیده شد. در این مقاله مروری از مقالات پژوهشی مذکور و 3 کتاب مرتبط استفاده شده است.
نتیجه ­گیری
در صورت استفاده از فوم اسفنجی به جای دامی­های سیلیکونی در سمعک­های RITEمی­توان علاوه بر حفظ مزایای سمعک­های RITE، بهره بیشتری در فرکانس­های پایین و میانی برای بیمار فراهم کرد. همچنین در این صورت می­توان مطابق استاندارد ANSI S3.46 2013 روش اتصالی یکسانی را هم برای ارزیابی­های کوپلری و هم برای ارزیابی­های گوش واقعی اتخاذ کرد. در نتیجه مشکل عدم تطابق بین RECD ها برطرف خواهد شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Coupler Based Verification: An Overview of Proposed Solution to Solve the Problem of Mismatch between RECDs Using Same Coupling Method

نویسندگان [English]

  • Masoud Bolndi Shirejini 1
  • Hamid Jalilvand 2
  • Ahmad-Reza Nazeri 2
1 Student Research Committee, MSc Student in Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistance Professor in Audiology, Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background and Aims: Using the real ear measurement, in addition to accurately fitting of the hearing aids, can reduce the frequent referral of patients to hearing-related clinics. Therefore, audiologists can save time and energy. Currently, real ear assessments are conducted at two general forms in clinics: 1. Real ear based verification, and 2. Coupler based verification. In the present review article, the focus is on coupler based verifications. Because the test of the RECD is one of the main components of the coupler based verifications, we made an attempt to outline the role of this test, based on the new standard of ANSI S3.46-2013, at fitting of hearing aids. Then, using the suggested coupling method, we tried to solve the challenge of mismatch between different RECDs.
Materials and Methods: We searched the subject of hearing aids verification based on coupler in databases of GoogleScholar, Proquest, Pubmed, and Sciencedirect among the publication between 1980-2017. In this search, we used the following keywords: Hearing Aid Verification, Real Ear to Coupler Difference,RITE hearing aids, and coupling of hearing aids. A total of 45 papers were found and 35 were selected. The present paper is based on these original articles and three related text books.
Conclusion: Using foam instead of silicone domes in receiver of RITE hearing aids, in addition to maintaining the benefits of RITE hearing aids, can result in more gain at low and middle frequencies for patients. Also, in accordance with ANSI S3.46 2013standard, we can use the same coupling method for both coupler based and real ear based verifications.
 
Keywords: 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Coupler Based Verification
  • Real Ear to Coupler Difference
  • Receiver in ihe Ear Hearing Aids
  • Same Coupling Method
  • ANSI S3.46-2013 Standard
1. Kochkin S. MarkeTrak VIII: Consumer satisfaction with hearing aids is slowly increasing. The Hearing Journal. 2010 Jan 1;63(1):19-20.##

2. The Acoustics of Hearing Aids, Part 2: A Closer Look at Boyle's Law. The Hearing Review (Online) 2013 May 30.

3. Swan IR, Gatehouse S. The value of routine in-the-ear measurement of hearing aid gain. British journal of audiology. 1995 Jan 1;29(5):271-7. ##

4. Hawkins DB, Cook JA. Hearing aid software predictive gain values: How accurate are they?. The Hearing Journal. 2003 Jul 1;56(7):26-8. ##

5. Katz J, Chasin M, English K, Hood L, Tillery K. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. Seventh Edition. Wolter Kluwer Health. 2015. ##

6. Moore BC. Speech mapping is a valuable tool for fitting and counseling patients. The Hearing Journal. 2006 Aug 1;59(8):26-8. ##

7. Vasil-Dilaj K, Cienkowski KM. The Influence of Receiver Size on Magnitude of Acoustic and Perceived Measures of Occlusion. American Journal of Audiology (Online) 2011 Jun 01;20(1):61-8. ##

8. Kuk F, Baekgaard L. Hearing Aid Selection and BTEs: Choosing Among Various``Open-ear''and``Receiver-in-canal''Options. Hearing Review. 2008;15(3):22. ##

9. Metz M. Sandlin's Textbook of Hearing Aid Amplification Technical and Clinical Considerations. 3rd ed. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2014. ##

10. MacKenzie DJ. Open‐canal fittings and the hearing aid occlusion effect. The Hearing Journal. 2006 Nov 1;59(11):50-2. ##

11. Kuk F, Keenan D. How do vents affect hearing aid performance?. Hearing Review. 2006 Feb;13(2):34. ##

12. MPO: A Forgotten Parameter in Hearing Aid Fitting. The Hearing Review (Online) 2008 Jun 04. ##

13. Kuk F, Keenan D, Baekgaard L. Speech-in-Noise Performance of a Micro-size BTE. Hearing Review. 2007;14(11):64. ##

14. Sara Conrad. Perceived Occlusion and Comfort in Receiver-in-the-Ear Hearing Aids. Ann Arbor: James Madison University; 2012. ##

15. Saunders GH, Morgan DE. Impact on hearing aid targets of measuring thresholds in dB HL versus dB SPL: El impacto en la medición de los umbrales en dB HL o en dB SPL, en las metas de un auxiliar auditivo. International Journal of Audiology. 2003 Jan 1;42(6):319-26. ##

16. Bagatto MP, Scollie SD, Seewald RC, Moodie KS, Hoover BM. Real-ear-to-coupler difference predictions as a function of age for two coupling procedures. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2002 Sep 1;13(8):407-15. ##

17. Aarts NL, Caffee CS. Manufacturer predicted and measured REAR values in adult hearing aid fitting: Accuracy and clinical usefulness. International Journal of Audiology. 2005 Jan 1;44(5):293-301. ##

18. Aazh H, Moore BC. The value of routine real ear measurement of the gain of digital hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2007 Sep 1;18(8):653-64. ##

19. Kochkin S, Beck DL, Christensen LA, Compton-Conley C, Fligor BJ, Kricos PB, Turner RG. MarkeTrak VIII: The impact of the hearing healthcare professional on hearing aid user success. Hearing Review. 2010 Apr;17(4):12-34. ##

20. McCreery RW, Bentler RA, Roush PA. The characteristics of hearing aid fittings in infants and young children. Ear and hearing. 2013 Nov;34(6). ##

21. Scollie S. New RECDs and a New ANSI Standard: Revisiting RECD Basics and Applications [Internet]. audiologyonline. 2016 [cited 18 August 2017]. Available from: http://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/new-recds-and-ansi-standard-16380##

22. Moodie KS, Seewald RC, Sinclair ST. Procedure for predicting real-ear hearing aid performance in young children. American Journal of Audiology. 1994 Mar 1;3(1):23-31. ##

23. Munro KJ, Toal S. Measuring the real-ear to coupler difference transfer function with an insert earphone and a hearing instrument: Are they the same?. Ear and Hearing. 2005 Feb 1;26(1):27-34. ##

24. Moodie S, Pietrobon J, Rall E, Lindley G, Eiten L, Gordey D, Davidson L, Moodie KS, Bagatto M, Haluschak MM, Folkeard P. Using the real-ear-to-coupler difference within the american academy of audiology pediatric amplification guideline: Protocols for applying and predicting earmold RECDs. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2016 Mar 1;27(3):264-75. ##

25. Keefe DH, Bulen JC, Arehart KH, Burns EM. Ear‐canal impedance and reflection coefficient in human infants and adults. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1993 Nov;94(5):2617-38. ##

26. Sanborn PE. Predicting hearing aid response in real ears. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1998 Jun;103(6):3407-17. ##

27. Dillon H. Hearing aids. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme; 2012. ##

28. Kemp RJ, Bankaitis AE. Infection control in audiology. Audiology Online. 2000 Jun;4. ##

29. Bagatto M, Moodie S, Scollie S, Seewald R, Moodie S, Pumford J, Liu KR. Clinical protocols for hearing instrument fitting in the Desired Sensation Level method. Trends in amplification. 2005;9(4):199-226. ##

30. Arlinger S, Kinnefors C. Reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for insert earphones. Audiology. 1989 Jan 1;28(sup1):195-8. ##

31. Gartrell EL, Church GT. Effect of microphone location in ITE versus BTE hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 1990 Jul;1(3):151-3. ##

32. Munro KJ, Lazenby A. Use of the 'real-ear to dial difference' to derive real-ear SPL from hearing level obtained with insert earphones. Br J Audiol 2001 10;35(5):297. ##

33. Munro KJ, Davis J. Deriving the real-ear SPL of audiometric data using the “coupler to dial difference” and the “real ear to coupler difference”. Ear and Hearing. 2003 Apr 1;24(2):100-10. ##

34. Revit L. The circle of decibels: Relating the hearing test, to the hearing instrument, to real ear response. The Hearing Review. 1997;4:35-8. ##

35. Gustafson S, Pittman A, Fanning R. Effects of Tubing Length and Coupling Method on Hearing Threshold and Real-Ear to Coupler Difference Measures. American Journal of Audiology (Online) 2013 06;22(1):190-9##

36. Scollie SD, Seewald RC, Cornelisse LE, Jenstad LM. Validity and repeatability of level-independent HL to SPL transforms. Ear and Hearing. 1998 Oct 1;19(5):407-13. ##

37. Bentler RA, Pavlovic CV. Transfer functions and correction factors used in hearing aid evaluation and research. Ear and Hearing. 1989 Feb 1;10(1):58-63. ##

38. Lewis DE, Stelmachowicz PG. Real ear to 6-cm3 coupler differences in young children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 1993 Feb 1;36(1):204-9. ##