Evaluating a smartphone digits-in-noise test as part of the audiometric test battery

Jenni-Mari Potgieter, De Wet Swanepoel, Cas Smits, Jenni-Mari Potgieter, De Wet Swanepoel, Cas Smits

Abstract

Speech-in-noise tests have become a valuable part of the audiometric test battery providing an indication of a listener's ability to function in background noise. A simple digits-in-noise (DIN) test could be valuable to support diagnostic hearing assessments, hearing aid fittings and counselling for both paediatric and adult populations. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the South African English smartphone DIN test's performance as part of the audiometric test battery. Design: This descriptive study evaluated 109 adult subjects (43 male and 66 female subjects) with and without sensorineural hearing loss by comparing pure-tone air conduction thresholds, speech recognition monaural performance scores (SRS dB) and the DIN speech reception threshold (SRT). An additional nine adult hearing aid users (four male and five female subjects) were included in a subset to determine aided and unaided DIN SRTs. Results: The DIN SRT is strongly associated with the best ear 4 frequency pure-tone average (4FPTA) (rs = 0.81) and maximum SRS dB (r = 0.72). The DIN test had high sensitivity and specificity to identify abnormal pure-tone (0.88 and 0.88, respectively) and SRS dB (0.76 and 0.88, respectively) results. There was a mean signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improvement in the aided condition that demonstrated an overall benefit of 0.84 SNR dB. Conclusion: The DIN SRT was significantly correlated with the best ear 4FPTA and maximum SRS dB. The DIN SRT provides a useful measure of speech recognition in noise that can evaluate hearing aid fittings, manage counselling and hearing expectations.

Keywords: audiometry; diagnostic; digits-in-noise; hearing loss; hearing screening; hearing test; smartphone; speech-in-noise.

Conflict of interest statement

The University of Pretoria has assigned the IP of the hearZA DIN smartphone test for commercialisation.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
(a) Scatterplot indicating the correlation between the best ear 4 frequency pure-tone average and maximum speech recognition monaural performance scores; (b) Scatterplot indicating the correlation between the best ear 4 frequency pure-tone average and digits-in-noise signal-to-noise ratio; (c) Scatterplot indicating the correlation between the best ear maximum speech recognition monaural performance scores and digits-in-noise signal-to-noise ratio.

References

    1. Hughson W., & Westlake H. (1944). Manual for a program outline for rehabilitation of aural casualties both military and civilian. , 48, 1–15.
    1. Jansen S., Luts H., Wagener K.C., Frachet B., & Wouters J. (2010). The French digit-triplet test: A hearing screening tool for speech intelligibility in noise. , 49, 378–387.
    1. Jerger J., & Jerger S. (1980). Measurement of hearing in adults. , 2, 1225–1250.
    1. Kaandorp M.W., Smits C., Merkus P., Goverts S.T., & Festen J.M. (2015). Assessing speech recognition abilities with digits in noise cochlear implant and hearing aid users. , 54, 48–57.
    1. Kollmeier B., & Wesselkamp M. (1997). Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. , 102, 2412–2421.
    1. Kramer S.E., Kapteyn T.S., Festen J.M., & Tobi H. (1996). The relationship between self-reported hearing disability and measures of auditory disability. , 35, 277–287.
    1. Laubscher A.M.U., & Tesner H.E.C. (1966). . Pretoria: Department of Speech Language Pathology and Audiology.
    1. Lucks Mendel L. (2008). Current considerations in pediatric speech audiometry. , 47, 546–553.
    1. Margolis R.H., & Saly G.L. (2007). Toward a standard description of hearing loss. , 46(12), 746–758.
    1. Nilsson K.A.M., Soli S.D., & Sullivan J.A. (1994). Development of the hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. , 95, 1085–1099.
    1. Plomp R., & Mimpen A.M. (1979). Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. , 18, 43–52.
    1. Potgieter J., Swanepoel D.W., Myburgh H.C., Hopper T.C., & Smits C. (2016). Development and validation of a smartphone-based digits-in-noise hearing test in South African English. , 55(7), 405–411.
    1. Potgieter J., Swanepoel D.W., Myburgh H.C., & Smits C. (2017). The South African smartphone digits-in-noise hearing test: Effect of age, hearing loss and speaking competence. .
    1. Smits C., Goverts T., & Festen J.M. (2013). The digits-in-noise test: Assessing auditory speech recognition abilities in noise. , 133(3), 1693–1706.
    1. Smits C., Kapteyn T.S., & Houtgast T. (2004). Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone. , 43, 15–28.
    1. Taylor B. (2003). Speech-in-noise tests: How and why to include them in your basic test-battery. , 56(1), 40–43.
    1. Theunissen M., Swanepoel D.W., & Hanekom J. (2009). Sentence recognition in noise: Variables in compilation and interpretation of tests. , 48(11), 743–757.
    1. Watson C.S., Kidd G.R., Miller J.D., Smits C., & Humes L.E. (2012). Telephone screening tests for functionally impaired hearing: Current use in seven countries and development of a US version. , 23(10), 757–767.
    1. Wilson R.H. (2011). Clinical experience with the words-in-noise test on 3430 veterans: Comparisons with pure-tone thresholds and word recognition in quiet. , 22, 405–423.
    1. Wong L.L.D., Soli S.D., Liu S., Han N., & Huang M.W. (2007). Development of the Mandarin Hearing in Noise Test (MHINT). , 28(2), 70S–74S.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する