PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 3772540

Using audiometric data base analysis.

Abstract

Audiometric data base analysis (ADBA) offers the most direct means of judging the effectiveness of a hearing conservation program (HCP) in preventing occupational hearing loss. However, numerous factors need to be accounted for if the findings are to be meaningful. This paper discusses several parameters known to influence the interpretation of group data statistics in assessing HCP effectiveness. Testing factors that affect the stability of the data base include audiometric techniques, calibration procedures, testing environment, and the motivation and prior experience of the subject. Pertinent population parameters include age, sex, race, current and prior noise exposures, learning effects, and the types of hearing protectors in use. Two case histories are presented to illustrate the application of ADBA techniques. Specific analysis procedures reviewed include comparisons of mean thresholds for selected industrial and nonindustrial populations, rates of change in mean hearing levels over a period of time, baseline and sequential test-retest comparisons, and different threshold shift criteria. The preliminary results of ADBA research being done by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) S12.12 Working Group are summarized, including desirable criterion ranges for several statistics established by applying them to control data sets.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J D Royster, L H Royster. 1986. Using audiometric data base analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00043764-198610000-00029

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects' ability to just follow conversation in competing speech, reversed speech, and noise backgrounds.

The performance on a conversation-following task by 24 hearing-impaired persons was compared with that of 24 matched controls with normal hearing in the presence of three background noises: (a) speech-spectrum random noise, (b) a male voice, and (c) the male voice played in reverse. The subjects' task was to readjust the sound level of a female voice (signal), every time the signal voice was attenuated, to the subjective level at which it was just possible to understand what was being said. To assess the benefit of lipreading, half of the material was presented audiovisually and half auditorily only. It was predicted that background speech would have a greater masking effect than reversed speech, which would in turn have a lesser masking effect than random noise. It was predicted that hearing-impaired subjects would perform more poorly than the normal-hearing controls in a background of speech. The influence of lipreading was expected to be constant across groups and conditions. The results showed that the hearing-impaired subjects were equally affected by the three background noises and that normal-hearing persons were less affected by the background speech than by noise. The performance of the normal-hearing persons was superior to that of the hearing-impaired subjects. The prediction about lipreading was confirmed. The results were explained in terms of the reduced temporal resolution by the hearing-impaired subjects.

Audiometry