Italo Cantore, Ruggero Lapenna, Walter Di Nardo, Francesca Forli, Rosa Grassia, Alessandra Murri, Alessandro Scorpecci, Enrico Muzzi, Antonietta De Lucia, Fabrizio De Paolis, Giampietro Ricci, Rolando Rolesi, Stefano Berrettini, Stefania Sicignano, Nicola Quaranta, Pasquale Marsella, Eva Orzan, Antonio Della Volpe, Paolo Ruscito
{"title":"意大利快速语言接收阈值测试，一种调查成年人在噪声中听觉障碍的新方法。","authors":"Italo Cantore, Ruggero Lapenna, Walter Di Nardo, Francesca Forli, Rosa Grassia, Alessandra Murri, Alessandro Scorpecci, Enrico Muzzi, Antonietta De Lucia, Fabrizio De Paolis, Giampietro Ricci, Rolando Rolesi, Stefano Berrettini, Stefania Sicignano, Nicola Quaranta, Pasquale Marsella, Eva Orzan, Antonio Della Volpe, Paolo Ruscito","doi":"10.1159/000538556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Purpose of our study was to compare two competing methods of performing bisyllabic word speech audiometry for the detection of the 50% speech reception threshold in noise (SRT50).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Classic method is performed submitting multiple word lists at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio. A newer Fast method - Italian Fast Speech Reception Threshold 50 (IFastSRT50) - is performed by means of program software with a single list of bisyllabic words and noise intensity shifting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Means comparison between SRT50 Classic and IFastSRT50 shows a slight significant correlation (r = 0.263; p = 0.044) and a wide significant difference: SRT50 Classic = -2.763 dB (SD = 4.1) and IFastSRT50 = -7.803 dB (SD = 2.1) (p < 0.0001). There is a high difference between the test execution time means (SRT50 Classic = 11 min, IFastSRT50 = 2 min; p < 0.0001). The correlation between test results and execution times was higher for SRT50 Classic than IFastSRT50.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IFastSRT50 test is a reliable method to quickly investigate signal-to-noise ratio needed to obtain 50% of recognition scores with bisyllabic words; it allows less execution time than SRT50 Classic method and can avoid patient fatigue and other limitations of different speech discrimination tests in noise as sentences based ones.</p>","PeriodicalId":55432,"journal":{"name":"Audiology and Neuro-Otology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Italian Fast Speech Reception Threshold Test: A New Method to Investigate Adult Auditory Impairment in Noise.\",\"authors\":\"Italo Cantore, Ruggero Lapenna, Walter Di Nardo, Francesca Forli, Rosa Grassia, Alessandra Murri, Alessandro Scorpecci, Enrico Muzzi, Antonietta De Lucia, Fabrizio De Paolis, Giampietro Ricci, Rolando Rolesi, Stefano Berrettini, Stefania Sicignano, Nicola Quaranta, Pasquale Marsella, Eva Orzan, Antonio Della Volpe, Paolo Ruscito\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000538556\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Purpose of our study was to compare two competing methods of performing bisyllabic word speech audiometry for the detection of the 50% speech reception threshold in noise (SRT50).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Classic method is performed submitting multiple word lists at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio. A newer Fast method - Italian Fast Speech Reception Threshold 50 (IFastSRT50) - is performed by means of program software with a single list of bisyllabic words and noise intensity shifting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Means comparison between SRT50 Classic and IFastSRT50 shows a slight significant correlation (r = 0.263; p = 0.044) and a wide significant difference: SRT50 Classic = -2.763 dB (SD = 4.1) and IFastSRT50 = -7.803 dB (SD = 2.1) (p < 0.0001). There is a high difference between the test execution time means (SRT50 Classic = 11 min, IFastSRT50 = 2 min; p < 0.0001). The correlation between test results and execution times was higher for SRT50 Classic than IFastSRT50.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IFastSRT50 test is a reliable method to quickly investigate signal-to-noise ratio needed to obtain 50% of recognition scores with bisyllabic words; it allows less execution time than SRT50 Classic method and can avoid patient fatigue and other limitations of different speech discrimination tests in noise as sentences based ones.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Audiology and Neuro-Otology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Audiology and Neuro-Otology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000538556\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology and Neuro-Otology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000538556","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Italian Fast Speech Reception Threshold Test: A New Method to Investigate Adult Auditory Impairment in Noise.
Introduction: Purpose of our study was to compare two competing methods of performing bisyllabic word speech audiometry for the detection of the 50% speech reception threshold in noise (SRT50).
Methods: Classic method is performed submitting multiple word lists at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio. A newer Fast method - Italian Fast Speech Reception Threshold 50 (IFastSRT50) - is performed by means of program software with a single list of bisyllabic words and noise intensity shifting.
Results: Means comparison between SRT50 Classic and IFastSRT50 shows a slight significant correlation (r = 0.263; p = 0.044) and a wide significant difference: SRT50 Classic = -2.763 dB (SD = 4.1) and IFastSRT50 = -7.803 dB (SD = 2.1) (p < 0.0001). There is a high difference between the test execution time means (SRT50 Classic = 11 min, IFastSRT50 = 2 min; p < 0.0001). The correlation between test results and execution times was higher for SRT50 Classic than IFastSRT50.
Conclusion: IFastSRT50 test is a reliable method to quickly investigate signal-to-noise ratio needed to obtain 50% of recognition scores with bisyllabic words; it allows less execution time than SRT50 Classic method and can avoid patient fatigue and other limitations of different speech discrimination tests in noise as sentences based ones.
期刊介绍：
''Audiology and Neurotology'' provides a forum for the publication of the most-advanced and rigorous scientific research related to the basic science and clinical aspects of the auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear. This journal seeks submission of cutting edge research opening up new and innovative fields of study that may improve our understanding and treatment of patients with disorders of the auditory and vestibular systems, their central connections and their perception in the central nervous system. In addition to original papers the journal also offers invited review articles on current topics written by leading experts in the field. The journal is of primary importance for all scientists and practitioners interested in audiology, otology and neurotology, auditory neurosciences and related disciplines.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
