Telecounselling and face to face hearing aid verification: repeated measures
Verificação da prótese auditiva realizada face a face e via teleconsulta: medidas repetidas
Deborah Viviane Ferrari; Gabriela Rosito Alvarez Bernardez-Braga; Patrícia Danieli Campos
Abstract
Purpose: to evaluate the repeated measurements of the real ear unaided response (REUR), real ear aided response (REAR) and insertion gain (REIG) conducted as face to face (F) and via telecounselling (T).
Method: longitudinal prospective study. Four measures of REUR, REAR and REIG (carried out with speech noise stimulus presented at 65 dB SPL at 0 ° azimuth) were obtained in 19 ears in normal hearing adults, face to face and via synchronous telecounsellings with remote control of the real ear equipment and interactive video. Polycom PVX software was used for desktop sharing and video and audio transmission. The Loca Area Network (LAN) USP was used for the connection (transmission rate: 384 kbps). Dahlberg's casual errors were calculated for obtaining the measures for frequencies from 250 to 8000 Hz.
Results: casual errors between F and T measures were very similar, being greater for frequencies above 4 kHz. The differences between F and T measures were no greater than the variability reported for real ear measures.
Conclusion: probe microphone measures obtained via telecounselling provides reliable results and similar to those obtained by standard procedures.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: avaliar as medidas repetidas da resposta de ressonância da orelha externa sem (REUR) e com uso de amplificação (REAR) e o ganho de inserção (REIG), realizados face a face e via teleconsulta.
Método: estudo prospectivo longitudinal. Foram realizadas quatro repetições da REUR, REAR e REIG (com estímulo speech noise apresentado em 65 dB NPS e 0o azimute) em 19 orelhas de adultos ouvintes normais, via face a face (F) e teleconsulta síncrona por controle remoto de aplicativo (T) e vídeo interativo. O software Polycom PVX foi utilizado para compartilhamento e transmissão de áudio e vídeo. A conexão foi realizada via LAN (Local Area Network) USP na velocidade de 384 kbps. Foi calculado o erro causal (Dalhberg) entre as quatro medidas para frequências de 250 a 8000 Hz.
Resultados: os erros casuais entre as medidas F e T foram muito semelhantes, sendo maiores nas frequências acima de 4 kHz. As diferenças e variações entre as medidas F e T estavam dentro da magnitude de variabilidade do procedimento de medidas com microfone sonda.
Conclusão: as medidas com microfone sonda via teleconsulta fornece resultados confiáveis e similares aos obtidos pelo procedimento padrão.
Palavras-chave
Referências
1. Hawkins DB, Cook JA. Hearing aid software predictive gain values: how accurate are they? Hear J. 2003;56(7):26-34.
2. Aarts NL, Caffee CS. Manufacturer predicted and measured REAR values in adult hearing aid fitting: accuracy and clinical usefulness. Int J Audiol. 2005; 44(5):293-301.
3. American Academy of Audiology. Guidelines for the audiologic management of adult hearing impairment. United States: AAA, 2008.
4. Dirks DD, Ahlstrom JB, Eisenberg LS. Effects of probe insertion depth on real ear measurements. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1994; 110(1):64-74.
5. Stone MA, Moore BCJ. Estimated variability of real-ear insertion response (REIR) due to loudspeaker type and placement. Int J Audiol. 2004;43(5):271-5.
6. Ickes MA, Hawkins DB, Cooper WA. Effect of reference microphone location and loudspeaker azimuth on probe tube microphone measurements. J Am Acad Audiol. 1991 Jul;2(3):156-63.
7. Lantz J, Jensen OD, Haastrup A, Olsen SO. Real-ear measurement verification for open, non-occluding hearing instruments. Int J Audiol. 2007;46(1):11-6.
8. Dillon H. Electroacustic Performance and Measurement. In: Dillon H. Hear Aids. Nova York: Thieme; 2001. p. 74-113.
9. Bernardez GRA, Assumpção MT, Coube CZV, Ferrari DV. Efeito da otite média crônica sobre a ressonância da orelha externa. In: Anais do 20º Encontro Internacional de Audiologia; 2005, São Paulo, SP. São Paulo: Academia Brasileira de Audiologia; 2005.
10. Givens DG, Elangovan S. Internet application to tele-audiology – "nothing' but net". Am J Audiol. 2003;12(2):56-65.
11. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Audiologists providing clinical services via telepractice: technical report. United States: ASHA, 2005.
12. Krumm M, Ferrari DV. Contemporary telehealth and telemedicine applications in audiology. Audiology Today. 2008;20:38-41.
13. Conselho Federal de Fonoaudiologia. Resolução no. 366 de 25 de abril de 2009. Dispõe sobre a regulamentação do uso do sistema Telessaúde em Fonoaudiologia. Conselho Federal de Fonoaudilogia, Brasília DF, 25 de abril de 2009.
14. Krumm M, Ribera J, Klich R. Providing basic hearing tests using remote computing technology. J Telemed Telecare. 2007;13(8):406-10.
15. Towers AD, Pisa J, Froelich TM, Krumm M. The reliability of click evoked and frequency specific auditory brainstem response testing using telehealth technology. Semin Hear. 2005;26(1):26-34.
16. Ramos A, Rodrigues C, Martinez-Beneyto P, Perez D, Gault A, Falcon JC. et al. Use of telemedicine in the remote programming of cochlear implants. Acta Otolaryngol. 2009;129(5):533-40.
17. Zumpano CE, Bevilacqua MC, Frederigue-Lopes NB, Costa OA. Programação remota dos sistemas de implante coclear. Rev Soc Bras Fonoaudiol. 2009;14(4):539-46.
18. Ferrari DV. Remote programming and verification as a mean to improve quality of hearing aid fitting. In: Rasmussen AN. et al. (Org.). Hearing aid fitting. Centertryk: Danavox, 2006;1:531-44.
19. Ferrari DV, Bernardez-Braga GRA. Remote verification of hearing aid performance. J Telemed Telecare. 2009;15(3):122-4.
20. Shaw P. Are real-ear measurements (REM) accurate when using the modified pressure with stored equalization (MPSE) method? Int J Audiol. 2010 Jun;49(6):463-6.
21. American National Standards Institute. (1997). Methods of Measurement of Real-Ear Performance Characteristics of Hearing Aids. ANSI S3.46-1997. New York: American National Standards Institute Inc.
22. Barlow NL, Auslander MC, Rines D, Stelmachowicz PG. Probe-tube microphone measures in hearing-impaired children and adults. Ear Hear. 1988;9(5):243-7.
23. Valente M, Valente M, Goebel J. Reliability and intersubject variability of the real ear unaided response. Ear Hear. 1991;12(3):216-20.
24. Hawkins DB, Mueller HG. Procedural considerations in probe-microphone measuements. In: Mueller HG, Hawkins DB, Northern JL. Probe microphone measurements: hearing aid selection and assessment. San Diego: Singular, 1992; p. 67-90.
25. Hawkins DB. Clinical ear canal probe tube measures. Ear Hear. 1987;8 Suppl 5:74-81.
26. Valente M, Potts LG, Valente M, Vass W, Goebel J. Intersubject variability of real ear sound pressure level: conventional and insert earphones. J Am Acad Audiol. 1994;5(6):390-8.
27. Dirks DD, Kincaid GE. Basic acoustic considerations of ear canal probe measurements. Ear Hear. 1987;8 Suppl 5:60-7.
28. Krumm, M, Huffman T, Dick K, Klich R. Telemedicine for audiology screening of infants. J Telemed Telecare. 2008;14(2):102-4.
29. Shapiro H, Huang T, Shaw T, Roland JT, Lalwani AK. Remote intraoperative monitoring during cochlear implant surgery is feasible and efficient. Otol Neurotol. 2008;29(4):495-8.
30. Ribera JE. Interjudge reliability and validation of telehealth applications of the Hearing in Noise Test. Semin Hear. 2005;26(1):13-8.
31. Krumm M, Ribera J, Schmiedge J. Using a telehealth medium for objective hearing testing: implications for supporting rural universal newborn hearing screening programs. Semin Hear. 2005;26(1):3-12.
Submetido em:
22/03/2011
Aceito em:
03/05/2011
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email