PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S Hartland

Publications and source records attributed to S Hartland.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Hearing threshold assessment post grommet insertion. Is it reliable?

We aimed to investigate whether auditory brainstem response (ABR), assessed immediately after grommet insertion, was an accurate measure of hearing threshold. Ten children were recruited (20 ears). Patients underwent transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) and ABR tests before and after grommet insertion under general anaesthetic. A third assessment was conducted at a six-week review, without anaesthetic or sedation. The hearing threshold in dB and the presence of TEOAE were recorded by senior audiologists. The results of each investigation were compared. At review, only 15 ABR and 17 TEOAE tests, of a possible 20, were recorded. Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions were recorded in 30 per cent of ears pre-operatively, 20 per cent of ears post-operatively and 82 per cent of ears at six-week review. The average ABR thresholds were 23.75 dB (range 10-45 dB) pre-operatively, 27.25 (range 15-40 dB) post-operatively and 15 dB (range 5-25 dB) at six-week review. Comparing pre- and post-operative assessment, decreased thresholds were seen in six ears and elevated thresholds in 11. Comparing the six-week review ABR with the post-operative ABR, 13 ears had decreased thresholds, by as much as 20 dB. Thresholds of 35 dB or greater were measured in six ears immediately after grommet insertion (maximum 40 dB). Threshold shifts of 15 dB or greater was observed in seven ears. The intra-subject variation was shown to be significant (p<0.001) when repeated measures analysis of variance was applied. We conclude that there is evidence that ABR can be inaccurate after grommet insertion, overestimating hearing thresholds. We believe that the mechanism by which the error is realised is temporary threshold shift.

Audiometry, Evoked Response↗

Error Analysis of Three Spherotensiometric Methods.

The error analysis in the determination of interfacial tension and contact angle using sphere tensiometry was fulfilled using the total differential analysis. The average error in interfacial tension for all three methods (the maximum force point method, two points method (F0 and H0/R) and process curve method) is smaller than 0.05 mN/m and average error in contact angle is smaller than 0.9 degrees. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗

Effect of Surface Mobility on Collision of Spherical Drops.

The collision of two spherical liquid drops is considered which allows the effect of coalescence on the formation and stability of dispersions to be studied. An analytical solution is derived for the variation in the hydrodynamic force with the approach velocity and the separation thickness during the impact in terms of the drop diameter, allowing for the effect of induced flow inside the drops. Setting this force equal to the rate of change of momentum of the drops enables the variation with time in the separation between the drops to be obtained in terms of the initial approach velocity, drop diameter, and viscosity ratio. The analysis also yields the time variation in the force and approach velocity. For a given impact velocity, the separation thickness decreases with time until a minimum value is reached, which decreases as the impact velocity and the viscosity ratio of the continuous and dispersed phases increase. Previous authors have only obtained the variation in the approach velocity with the unknown variable force and separation thickness during the impact and therefore could not obtain the variation in the separation thickness with time. Knowing this variation enables the possibility of coalescence during impact to be investigated. Coalescence is influenced by the minimum separation thickness attained at low impact velocities and by drop deformation and inertial drainage at high velocities. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗

Detailed Analysis of Determination of Contact Angle Using Sphere Tensiometry

The configurations of the interfacial menisci around a sphere during the pulling process were analyzed and the methods for the simultaneous determination of surface and interfacial tension and contact angle were discussed. Furthermore, a method for the determination of contact angle using sphere tensiometry, which is independent of interfacial tension, was developed and tested with experiments. Copyright 1997Academic Press

Journal Article↗