Clinical validation of automated audiometry with continuous noise-monitoring in a clinically heterogeneous population outside a sound-treated environment

Abstract

Objective: Examine the accuracy of automated audiometry in a clinically heterogeneous population of adults using the KUDUwave automated audiometer. Design: Prospective accuracy study. Manual audiometry was performed in a sound-treated room and automated audiometry was not conducted in a sound-treated environment. Study sample: 42 consecutively recruited participants from a tertiary otolaryngology department in Western Australia. Results: Absolute mean differences ranged between 5.12–9.68 dB (air-conduction) and 8.26–15 dB (bone-conduction). A total of 86.5% of manual and automated 4FAs were within 10 dB (i.e. ±5 dB); 94.8% were within 15 dB. However, there were significant (p < 0.05) differences between automated and manual audiometry at 250, 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz (air-conduction) and 500 and 1000 Hz (bone-conduction). The effect of age (≥55 years) on accuracy (p = 0.014) was not significant on linear regression (p > 0.05; R² = 0.11). The presence of a hearing loss (better ear ≥26 dB) did not significantly affect accuracy (p = 0.604; air-conduction), (p = 0.218; bone-conduction). Conclusions: This study provides clinical validation of automated audiometry using the KUDUwave in a clinically heterogeneous population, without the use of a sound-treated environment. Whilst threshold variations were statistically significant, future research is needed to ascertain the clinical significance of such variation.

Key Words:

• Automated audiometry
• audiometry
• hearing loss
• teleaudiology
• KUDUwave

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge all the participants in this study for the generous use of their time. We would also like to thank all the medical, nursing, and support staff from the Department of Otolaryngology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, and audiologists Amie Grandidge, Jonathan Constantine, Susan Tegg-Quin, Varsha Matthews, and Joanne Sahdeo.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.