Validating Four Hmong Word Recognition Tests With Normal-Hearing Bilingual Hmong Individuals.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to validate four digitally recorded and phonetically balanced 50-word recognition lists in the White Hmong dialect with normal-hearing bilingual Hmong adults. METHOD: Using a randomized, incomplete-block design, each participant listened to and repeated four unique Hmong lists delivered by a female and a male talker. Participants were also tested with an English word list-List 1A of the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. Participants' correct pronunciation of each word was scored. A nonparametric Mann-Whitney U Location Difference Test for Equivalence using two one-sided tests equivalence hypothesis: -0.02 < [(List_1) - (List_2)] < 0.02 was conducted to assess equivalence among all four Hmong and the English lists. RESULTS: Seventy Hmong speakers participated in this study (35 women, 35 men; M age = 29.5 years, SD = 7.1). In all four Hmong lists, 93.5% (187/200) words met the validation criteria for ≥ 92% correct pronunciation. The 13 difficult words were deemed adequate by a Hmong panel and, therefore, were included to maintain four unique, balanced word lists. The test revealed that the Hmong and English word lists were considered equivalent at the 2% bound. CONCLUSION: The four Hmong word lists were validated to ensure an equal range of word difficulty across the lists.

Can routine office-based audiometry predict cochlear implant evaluation results?

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Determining cochlear implant candidacy requires a specific sentence-level testing paradigm in best-aided conditions. Our objective was to determine if findings on routine audiometry could predict the results of a formal cochlear implant candidacy evaluation. We hypothesize that findings on routine audiometry will accurately predict cochlear implant evaluation results in the majority of candidates. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational, diagnostic study. METHODS: The charts of all adult patients who were evaluated for implant candidacy at a tertiary care center from June 2008 through June 2013 were included. Routine, unaided audiologic measures (pure-tone hearing thresholds and recorded monosyllabic word recognition testing) were then correlated with best-aided sentence-level discrimination testing (using either the Hearing in Noise Test or AzBio sentences test). RESULTS: The degree of hearing loss at 250 to 4,000 Hz and monosyllabic word recognition scores significantly correlated with sentence-level word discrimination test results. Extrapolating from this association, we found that 86% of patients with monosyllabic word recognition scores at or below 32% (or 44% for patients with private insurance) would meet candidacy requirements for cochlear implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Routine audiometric findings can be used to identify patients who are likely to meet cochlear implant candidacy upon formal testing. For example, patients with pure-tone thresholds (250, 500, 1,000 Hz) of ≥75 dB and/or a monosyllabic word recognition test score of ≤40% have a high likelihood of meeting candidacy criteria. Utilization of these predictive patterns during routine audiometric evaluation may assist hearing health professionals in deciding when to refer patients for a formal cochlear implant evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 127:216-222, 2017.