Evaluation of an internet-based speech-in-noise screening test for school-age children.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a Dutch online speech-in-noise screening test (in Dutch: "Kinderhoortest") in normal-hearing school-age children. Sub-aims were to study test-retest reliability, and the effects of presentation type and age on test results. DESIGN: An observational cross-sectional study at school. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were obtained through the online test in a training condition, and two test conditions: on a desktop computer and smartphone. The order of the test conditions was counterbalanced. STUDY SAMPLE: Ninety-four children participated (5-12 years), of which 75 children were normal-hearing (≤25 dB HL at 0.5 kHz, ≤20 dB HL at 1-4 kHz). RESULTS: There was a significant effect for test order for the two test conditions (first or second test), but not for presentation type (desktop computer or smartphone) (repeated measures analyses, F(1,75) = 12.48, p < 0.001; F(1,75) = 0.01, p = 0.982). SRT significantly improved by age year (first test: 0.25 dB SNR, 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.08, p = 0.004. Second test: 0.29 dB SNR, 95% CI: -0.46 to -0.11; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The online test shows potential for routine-hearing screening of school-age children, and can be presented on either a desktop computer or smartphone. The test should be evaluated further in order to establish sensitivity and specificity for hearing loss in children.

Laboratory evaluation of an optimised internet-based speech-in-noise test for occupational high-frequency hearing loss screening: Occupational Earcheck.

OBJECTIVE: The "Occupational Earcheck" (OEC) is a Dutch online self-screening speech-in-noise test developed for the detection of occupational high-frequency hearing loss (HFHL). This study evaluates an optimised version of the test and determines the most appropriate masking noise. DESIGN: The original OEC was improved by homogenisation of the speech material, and shortening the test. A laboratory-based cross-sectional study was performed in which the optimised OEC in five alternative masking noise conditions was evaluated. STUDY SAMPLE: The study was conducted on 18 normal-hearing (NH) adults, and 15 middle-aged listeners with HFHL. RESULTS: The OEC in a low-pass (LP) filtered stationary background noise (test version LP 3: with a cut-off frequency of 1.6 kHz, and a noise floor of -12 dB) was the most accurate version tested. The test showed a reasonable sensitivity (93%), and specificity (94%) and test reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient: 0.84, mean within-subject standard deviation: 1.5 dB SNR, slope of psychometric function: 13.1%/dB SNR). CONCLUSIONS: The improved OEC, with homogenous word material in a LP filtered noise, appears to be suitable for the discrimination between younger NH listeners and older listeners with HFHL. The appropriateness of the OEC for screening purposes in an occupational setting will be studied further.

Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 2: improving test sensitivity for noise-induced hearing loss.

OBJECTIVE: An easily accessible screening test can be valuable in the prevention of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). The Dutch National Hearing Foundation developed 'Earcheck', an internet-based speech-in-noise test, presenting CVC-words in stationary broadband noise. However, its sensitivity to detect NIHL appeared to be low, 51% ( Leensen et al, 2011 , part 1). The aim of the current study is to examine ways to improve Earcheck's sensitivity for (early) NIHL using different forms of noise filtering. DESIGN: The test's stationary broadband masking noise is replaced by six alternatives, including noises that have been temporally modulated, spectrally filtered by high-pass or low-pass filters, and combinations of temporal modulation and spectral filtering. STUDY SAMPLE: In this multi-centre study, 49 normal-hearing and 49 subjects with different degrees of NIHL participated. RESULTS: Hearing-impaired subjects deviated more clearly from normal performance when executing the test with alternative masking noises, except for the high-pass filtered conditions. Earcheck with low-pass filtered noise made the best distinction between normal hearing and NIHL, without reducing test reliability. The use of this noise condition improved the sensitivity of Earcheck to 95%. CONCLUSION: The use of low-pass filtered masking noise makes speech-in-noise tests more sensitive to detect NIHL in an early stage.

Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 1: test evaluation for noise-induced hearing loss identification.

OBJECTIVE: In the Netherlands three internet-based self-screening tests have been developed; the National Hearing Test (NHT), Earcheck (EC), and Occupational Earcheck (OEC). These tests are adaptive speech-in-noise tests using either digit triplets or monosyllables, presented in stationary speech-shaped noise. These tests can be highly valuable in increasing the awareness and prevention of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). This study evaluates these online speech-in-noise tests and investigates their potential to detect NIHL. DESIGN: In a multi-centre study the results of the three online screening tests are compared to pure-tone audiometry and to the Dutch sentence SRT test ( Plomp & Mimpen, 1979a ), which is considered the clinical standard. STUDY SAMPLE: In total, 49 normal-hearing listeners and 49 patients with different degrees of NIHL participated. RESULTS: The online tests show good reliability, but there is much overlap in outcomes between normal-hearing listeners and participants with early NIHL. In addition, rather low correlations of the test results with both the Dutch sentence SRT test and pure-tone thresholds are found. These findings result in rather low test sensitivity: 54% (NHT) and 51% (EC), or low specificity: 49% (OEC). CONCLUSIONS: The online screening tests in their current form are unsuitable to be used for early NIHL screening purposes.