Deriving the real-ear SPL of audiometric data using the "coupler to dial difference" and the "real ear to coupler difference"

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to compare the measured real-ear sound pressure level (SPL) of audiometer output with the derived real-ear SPL obtained by adding the coupler to dial difference (CDD) and real-ear to coupler difference (RECD) to the audiometer dial reading. DESIGN: The real-ear SPL and RECD were measured in one ear of 16 normally hearing subjects using a probe-tube microphone. The CDD transform and the RECD transfer function were measured in an HA1 and an HA2 2-cc coupler using an EAR-LINK foam ear-tip or a customized earmold. The RECD transfer function was measured using the EARTone ER 3A and the Audioscan RE770 insert earphone. RESULTS: The procedures were very reliable with mean differences on retest of less than 1 dB. The mean difference between the measured and derived real-ear SPL was generally less than 1 dB and rarely exceeded 3 dB in any subject. CONCLUSIONS: The CDD measured for an individual audiometer and the RECD measured for an individual ear can be used to derive a valid estimate of real-ear SPL when it has not been possible to measure this directly.     

Comparison of real-ear to coupler difference values in the right and left ear of adults using three earmold configurations

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to compare real-ear to coupler difference (RECD) values in the right and left ear of adults using three earmold configurations. DESIGN: The RECD was obtained from both ears of 18 normal hearing adults by subtracting the HA2 2-cc coupler response from the real-ear response using an ER-3A insert earphone and a swept pure tone on the Audioscan RM500 probe-tube microphone system. The measurements were made with a personal earmold, foam eartip, and oto-admittance tip. RESULTS: The mean difference between the right and left RECD was close to 0 dB for all earmold configurations and was not statistically significant on a repeated-measures analysis of variance (p > 0.05). In 90% of participants, the difference between ears was generally less than 3 dB at 0.5 to 4 kHz. CONCLUSIONS: Cooperative participants with non-occluding wax and normal middle ear function (on tympanometry) show small differences in RECD between the right and left ear, irrespective of the earmold configuration. The study has yet to be extended to the clinical setting where subject cooperation and earmold fit may differ from the present study. In the meantime, the findings from the present study indicate that where an RECD can be obtained from only one ear of a participant, it is probably best to use this to derive real-ear SPL of both ears instead of relying on average age appropriate corrections.     

Measuring the real-ear to coupler difference transfer function with an insert earphone and a hearing instrument: are they the same?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to compare the real-ear to coupler difference (RECD) measured with an insert earphone and two models of hearing instrument. DESIGN: The RECD was obtained from one ear of 18 normal-hearing subjects by subtracting the 2-cc coupler (HA1 and HA2) response from a real-ear aided response, using a conventional probe-tube microphone system. The measurements were made with a conventional ER-3A earphone and two models of behind-the-ear hearing instrument (Unitron US80, Unitron, Kitchener, Canada; and Widex Diva, Widex, Vaerloese, Denmark). RESULTS: The procedures were very reliable, with mean differences on retest of less than 1 dB. There were statistically significant differences between the mean RECDs obtained using an insert earphone compared with those obtained with each hearing instrument (p < 0.05). The differences were greatest when using the HA2 2-cc coupler. For example, the maximum difference in mean RECD between the insert earphone and the Widex Diva was 6 dB and 11 dB when using the HA1 and the HA2 2-cc coupler, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The RECD is dependent on the acoustic impedance of the sound source, the coupling system, and the coupler and ear. The acoustic impedance may be different for an insert earphone and a given hearing instrument. Therefore, the RECD measured with an insert earphone may not always accurately represent the difference in performance of a hearing instrument measured in the real ear and the 2-cc coupler.     

The influence of RECD transducer when deriving real-ear sound pressure level

OBJECTIVE: The main aim of the present study was to compare the derived and directly measured real-ear hearing instrument performance for a range of commonly used hearing instruments. A secondary aim was to compare the real-ear to coupler difference (RECD) measured using the ER-3A insert earphone and a selection of hearing instruments. DESIGN: The real-ear SPL was measured for four models of hearing instrument in 20 adult participants using an Audioscan RM500 real-ear system. This was compared with the derived real-ear SPL obtained by adding the RECD (measured using the ER-3A insert earphone) to the 2-cc coupler response of each hearing instrument. Measurements were made at 1/12 octave intervals from 0.2 to 6 kHz, using both the HA1 and HA2 2-cc coupler. In addition, the RECD was measured using four models of hearing instrument for comparison with the ER-3A insert earphone values. RESULTS: The procedures were very reliable with mean differences on retest of less than 1 dB. Repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences between the measured and derived real-ear SPL (p < 0.001) for several models of hearing instrument. The derived responses using the HA1 coupler yielded good accuracy, whereas the HA2 yielded less accuracy. For three models of hearing instrument, the maximum difference was between 5 and 10 dB when using the HA2 coupler. The mean RECD measured with the ER-3A insert earphone and HA2 coupler was not always equivalent to the RECD measured with the hearing instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of the derived real-ear response obtained using an RECD, measured with an ER-3A insert earphone, is very good when an HA1 is used for the coupler component of the RECD. The accuracy diminishes somewhat with the HA2 coupler, especially for undamped hearing instruments. The accuracy of the derived real-ear response is very good when the RECD is measured using the hearing instrument and the HA1 or the HA2 coupler.     

Perforation of the tympanic membrane and its effect on the real-ear-to-coupler difference acoustic transform function.

It is not always possible to undertake extensive real-ear measurements, especially in infants and young children. An alternative approach is to estimate the real-ear SPL by use of an acoustic transform function such as the real-ear-to-coupler difference (RECD). This may be used to estimate the real-ear sound pressure level (SPL) obtained from an insert transducer or a hearing instrument. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of tympanic membrane perforation on the RECD transform function. Subjects in the study comprised two groups of 12 individuals aged between nine and 65 years. One group of subjects had a tympanic membrane perforation and was recruited to the study before admission for myringoplasty. There was no evidence of middle ear pathology in the remaining subjects who comprised the control group. An RECD transform function for an insert transducer was measured on each subject using the standard clinical protocol on the Audioscan RM500 real-ear measurement system. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups; mean RECD transform value of the perforation group was 9-12 dB lower than the corresponding value in the control group at audiometric frequencies below 1.5 kHz. This difference is probably due to the perforation acting as a vent and allowing low-frequency acoustic energy to escape into the middle ear cavity. Use of an average RECD transform function to estimate real-ear SPL in subjects with a perforation will overestimate the SPL reaching the tympanic membrane. As a result, the derived real-ear SPL obtained by use of either an insert transducer or a hearing instrument will be overestimated. This has implications for the selection and verification of a hearing instrument. The difference in the mean RECD transform function between the control group and subjects with a tympanic membrane perforation supports the use of individually measured RECD values wherever possible.     

Is the real-ear to coupler difference independent of the measurement earphone?

Direct measurement of real-ear hearing aid performance can be obtained using a probe tube microphone system. Alternatively, it can be derived by adding the real-ear to coupler difference (RECD) to the electroacoustic performance of the hearing instrument measured in a 2-cc coupler. Inherent in this derivation is the assumption that the RECD measured with one transducer can be applied to a coupler measurement performed with a different transducer. For the RECD procedure to be valid, it should be independent of the measurement transducer. The Audioscan RM500 is an example of a commercially available real-ear measurement system that incorporates a clinical protocol for the measurement of the RECD. The RECD can be measured on the Audioscan RM500 using a standard EAR-Tone ER-3A insert earphone or the Audioscan's own RE770 insert earphone. The aim of this study was to compare the RECDs obtained with these two earphones. The Audioscan RM500 was used to measure the RECD from the right ears of 18 adult subjects ranging in age from 22 to 36 years (mean 25 years). Measurements were made with the EAR-Tone ER-3A and RE770 insert earphone and three earmould configurations: (1) the EARLINK foam ear-tip; (2) a hard acrylic shell earmould with the same length of acoustical tubing as the foam ear-tip (25 mm); and (3) the shell ear mould with the appropriate length of tubing for a behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aid fitting (approximately 35-45 mm). The results show that the mean RECD was around 3 dB higher at 1.5 kHz with the foam ear-tip when measured with the RE770 earphone than when measured with the ER-3A earphone. The same magnitude of difference was obtained with the shell earmould and 25-mm tubing; however, this increased to 9 dB when the tubing was increased to around 40 mm for a BTE fitting. The difference in mean RECD with the two earphones was statistically significant on a repeated-measures ANOVA for every earmould configuration (p<0.001). The results of this study demonstrate that the RECD procedure that uses an HA2 coupler and earmould is not independent of the measurement earphone. This has important implications for clinical practice.     

Effect of earmold fit on predicted real ear SPL using a real ear to coupler difference procedure

OBJECTIVES: The goal of Experiment I was to quantify the SPL entering the ear canal via a secondary pathway created by a vent in the earmold and/or a slit leak around the earmold. The goal of Experiment II was to determine the validity of a real ear to coupler difference (RECD) procedure under conditions that are likely to produce errors (e.g., when hearing aid gain in the low frequencies is minimal and large negative RECD values occur as a result of venting or a loosely fitting earmold). DESIGN: In Experiment I, the SPL entering the ear via the secondary pathway was measured in 61 hearing-impaired children and 13 normal-hearing adults. In Experiment II, traditional probe microphone measures of real ear SPL were compared to the SPL predicted using the RECD procedure in five normal-hearing adults with loosely fitting earmolds. RESULTS: Results of Experiment I indicated that sound entered the ear canal unattenuated at 250 and 500 Hz, regardless of earmold fit, vent size, or subject age. In Experiment II, the largest differences between traditional probe microphone measures of SPL and predicted measures were noted when hearing aid gain was 0 dB and large negative RECD values were present. When hearing aid gain was minimal and the RECD was in the -10 to -22 dB range, predicted values underestimated the real ear SPL by an average of 14 dB. CONCLUSIONS: Although the results of this study apply only to a limited range of conditions found in clinical practice, in those cases, the errors may influence clinical decisions about the type of hearing aid fitted and the amount of gain provided. Potential solutions to this problem are discussed.     

Use of the 'real-ear to dial difference' to derive real-ear SPL from hearing level obtained with insert earphones

The electroacoustic characteristics of a hearing instrument are normally selected for individuals using data obtained during audiological assessment. The precise inter-relationship between the electroacoustic and audiometric variables is most readily appreciated when they have been measured at the same reference point, such as the tympanic membrane. However, it is not always possible to obtain the real-ear sound pressure level (SPL) directly if this is below the noise floor of the probe-tube microphone system or if the subject is unco-operative. The real-ear SPL may be derived by adding the subject's real-ear to dial difference (REDD) acoustic transform to the audiometer dial setting. The aim of the present study was to confirm the validity of the Audioscan RM500 to measure the REDD with the ER-3A insert earphone. A probe-tube microphone was used to measure the real-ear SPL and REDD from the right ears of 16 adult subjects ranging in age from 22 to 41 years (mean age 27 years). Measurements were made from 0.25 kHz to 6 kHz at a dial setting of 70 dB with an ER-3A insert earphone and two earmould configurations: the EAR-LINK foam ear-tip and the subjects' customized skeleton earmoulds. Mean REDD varied as a function of frequency but was typically approximately 12 dB with a standard deviation (SD) of +/- 1.7 dB and +/- 2.7 dB for the foam ear-tip and customized earmould, respectively. The mean test-retest difference of the REDD varied with frequency but was typically 0.5 dB (SD 1 dB). Over the frequency range 0.5-4 kHz, the derived values were found to be within 5 dB of the measured values in 95% of subjects when using the EAR-LINK foam ear-tip and within 4 dB when using the skeleton earmould. The individually measured REDD transform can be used in clinical practice to derive a valid estimate of real-ear SPL when it has not been possible to measure this directly.     

Assessment of FM systems with an ear canal probe tube microphone system

A technique is described to measure the real-ear performance of an FM system using an ear canal probe tube microphone device. The method involves placement of the FM microphone next to the monitoring (compression) microphone of the probe tube assembly to produce a constant sound pressure level input to the FM system. With the probe tube in the ear canal, a hearing aid alone is measured with a 60 dB SPL input and the FM system attached to the hearing aid (personal FM system) is assessed with an 80 dB SPL input to account for the higher input levels that occur due to the 6 inch distance between the speaker's mouth and the FM microphone. This technique permits a rapid comparison of the real-ear response of the hearing aid and the FM system.     

Real-Ear to coupler difference in patients with ear drum perforation.

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of ear drum perforation on real-ear to coupler difference (RECD) in adults. RECD was measured using a probe tube microphone system in 22 patients with ear drum perforations. Twenty-two normal subjects served as controls. For normal subjects, RECD was in good agreement with the values reported in the literature. For the perforated ears, the RECD was up to 8 dB smaller in the frequency range from 0.5 to 1 kHz. There was no significant difference at frequencies below 0.25 kHz and above 1 kHz. A much larger intersubject variability was found in the experimental group. The mean intersubject standard deviation was 4.4 dB in the experimental group as contrasted with 2.2 dB in the control group. Neither the equivalent ear canal volume nor the perforation size appeared to be correlated with the degree of RECD reduction over lower frequencies. These results strongly suggest the need for individual RECD measurements, rather than using the average normal RECD, to appropriately compensate for the reduced transmission of lower-frequency sounds in fitting hearing aids for patients with ear drum perforations.     

Performance of custom-fit versus fixed-format hearing aids for precipitously sloping high-frequency hearing loss

This study compared the real-ear response provided by custom-fit hearing aids to the closest matching fixed-format disposable hearing aids in patients with precipitous high-frequency hearing loss. Laboratory and field measures of aided performance were obtained to compare patient performance with the custom-fit and fixed-format hearing aids. In addition, coupler versus real-ear response differences were compared for the two hearing aid types. The results revealed that relatively close approximations to the real-ear aided responses of the custom-fit instruments were possible for most participants using seven fixed acoustic formats. No significant differences in mean performance between the two instrument types were observed for aided speech recognition or field ratings of aided performance, although mean patient satisfaction was lower for the disposable hearing aids. The real-ear to coupler difference was greater for the disposable hearing aid than for the custom-fit instruments, presumably owing to its deeper insertion into the ear canal.     

Probe tube microphone measures of loudness discomfort levels in children

Loudness discomfort levels (LDLs) have been advocated as a means for selecting the SSPL90 setting of an individual's hearing aid. Kawell, Kopun, and Stelmachowicz (Ear Hear 1988; 9: 133-136) recently developed a procedure to measure LDLs in children. Several procedural cautions, involving the hearing aid stimulus delivery and sound field calibration, have been noted with this method. As a means of overcoming these problems, a new method utilizing insert earphone derived stimuli delivered to a child's ear-mold with probe tube microphone monitoring of real-ear sound pressure level was explored. Twenty children, aged 7 to 14 years, served as subjects. The advantage of the present method lies in the procedural conveniences and the ability to compare real-ear audiometric measures and hearing aid performance.     

鼓膜穿孔对真耳-耦合腔差的影响

目的:探讨鼓膜穿孔对真耳一耦合腔差(RECD)的影响.方法:34例(34耳)中耳功能及听力正常成人为对照组,30例(34耳)干性鼓膜穿孔患者为实验组,用真耳分析仪测试RECD.结果:实验组与对照组RECD值比较在1 kHz以下(含1 kHz)及4 kHz差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),实验组比对照组要小;实验组的标准差变化较大,平均为4.4 dB,而对照组为1.4 dB;实验组RECD值与等效外耳道容积大小在0.75 kHz以下呈显著负相关(r=-0.70,P＜0.01),而1 kHz以上无相关性;鼓膜穿孔大小对RECD值无影响.结论:鼓膜穿孔患者RECD值在不同频率变化较大,选配助听器时应进行真耳测量以测试个体RECD,尽量不用平均值,适当增加低频的增益.     

Clinical protocols for hearing instrument fitting in the Desired Sensation Level method

A discussion of the protocols used particularly in the clinical application of the Desired Sensation Level (DSL) Method is presented in this chapter. In the first section, the measurement and application of acoustic transforms is described in terms of their importance in the assessment phase of the amplification fitting process. Specifically, the implications of individual ear canal acoustics and their impact on accurately defining hearing thresholds are discussed. Detailed information about the statistical strength of the real-ear-to-coupler difference (RECD) measurement and how to obtain the measure in young infants is also provided. In addition, the findings of a study that examined the relationship between behavioral and electrophysiologic thresholds in real-ear SPL is described. The second section presents information related to the electroacoustic verification of hearing instruments. The RECD is discussed in relation to its application in simulated measurements of real-ear hearing instrument performance. In particular, the effects of the transducer and coupling method during the RECD measurement are described in terms of their impact on verification measures. The topics of insertion gain, test signals, and venting are also considered. The third section presents three summary tables that outline the hearing instrument fitting process for infants, children, and adults. Overall, this chapter provides both clinical and scientific information about procedures used in the assessment and verification stages of the DSL Method.     

Evaluation of a probe-tube insertion technique for measuring the real-ear-to-coupler difference (RECD) in young infants

A common strategy for measuring the real-ear response of the real-ear-to-coupler difference (RECD) in the pediatric population is to insert a probe-tube separately from the eartip. This strategy is at times difficult to implement while attempting to obtain the measurement from a young infant. An RECD probe-tube insertion technique that involves connecting the probe-tube to an eartip with plastic film for simultaneous insertion was examined on 30 infants. Repeated measurements were completed on each infant to obtain within-session test-retest reliability data. Probe-tube insertion depth was also examined across participants to provide a guideline for the infant population. Findings indicate that reliable RECD values can be obtained in infants when the probe-tube is extended approximately two to four millimeters (mm) beyond the eartip or 11 mm from the entrance to the ear canal. Clinical implications of this work are discussed.     

Signal delivery/real ear measurement system for hearing aid selection and fitting.

This report describes a signal delivery/real ear measurement system for application in the hearing aid selection and fitting process. This signal delivery/real ear measurement system provides a means for quantifying a listener's auditory characteristics (e.g., thresholds, loudness discomfort levels) in a manner that is compatible with electroacoustic measures of hearing aid performance. The signal delivery/real ear measurement system consists of a button-type hearing aid receiver coupled to the listener's personal earmold, and a probe tube microphone system to measure the signal level within the occluded ear canal. This signal delivery/real ear measurement system was used to measure detection thresholds and loudness discomfort levels in severe/profoundly hearing-impaired school-age children, with results indicating good test-retest reliability in behavioral responses. The findings presented in this report relate to the intersession electroacoustic variability associated with this instrumentation. In addition, the potential application of this or a similar system for measuring real ear to 2-cc coupler difference values is illustrated and discussed.     

Effect of recent hearing aid improvements on management of the hearing impaired

Recent developments in hearing aid technology and earmold acoustics have improved the outlook for the hearing impaired. Advances involving the electric microphone, integrated circuit, and earmold/hearing aid coupling system have affected such features as compression amplification, filtering, and frequency characteristics of the amplified signal at the eardrum. The resulting changes in hearing aid fitting approaches are described, including factors which are considered in such fittings as in-the-ear, binaural, CROS and BICROS, with examples of difficult cases. Hearing aids are then discussed in the context of a broader rehabilitation strategy.     

The effect of reference microphone placement on sound pressure levels at an ear level hearing aid microphone

The present study was designed to investigate the effects of reference microphone location on probe tube microphone measures of hearing aid response. The reference microphone of a clinical probe tube microphone system was located either at a position on the cheek (position A) or in close proximity to the microphone of an ear level hearing aid (position B). With sound pressure level (SPL) held constant at the reference microphone, the SPL at the position of the hearing aid microphone was measured at 14 test frequencies using a 1/8-inch condenser microphone. Measures were obtained on ten male and ten female subjects. Results indicated large frequency-dependent deviations in SPL at the hearing aid microphone, compared to that measured at the reference microphone, when the reference microphone was at position A. In the 1200 to 2000 Hz range, the SPL at the hearing aid microphone was as much as 9.5 dB higher than at the reference microphone. There were no large frequency-dependent variations with the reference microphone in position B, but the SPL at the hearing aid microphone location was approximately 3 dB higher than at the reference microphone. Results suggest that estimates of hearing aid output can be affected markedly by the reference microphone location. Clinical implications of the impact of reference microphone location on probe microphone measures of hearing aid gain and saturation sound pressure levels are discussed.     

Anticipating real-ear insertion response using an external auditory canal model

ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine the acoustic characteristics of the external auditory canal (EAC) and predict the real-ear aided response (REAR) using an EAC model that includes the standing wave effect.MethodsThe EAC transfer function equations were derived by summing the incoming and outgoing waves. First, we investigated the real-ear unaided gain (REUG). Second, seven patients (eight ears) wearing hearing aids (HAs) were enrolled as subjects to examine the REAR. We conducted wideband tympanometry (WBT) to measure the absorbance, the frequency response at 65 dB (65dB-FR) of the HAs, and the measured REAR for an international speech test signal (ISTS) at 65 dB.ResultsThe EAC model that includes the standing-wave effect is considered to be valid from examination of the REUG. A significant correlation was found between the measured and calculated REARs at 900 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, and 3000 Hz in an uncorrelated test. A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) found significant differences in the 65dB-FR and the measured REARs at 800, 900, 1000, and 2000 Hz, but this difference disappeared after correction of the calculated acoustic characteristics of the EAC.ConclusionsBy measuring the WBT characteristics and correcting them with an EAC model, the in-situ REAR can be determined from the HA characteristics in the mid-frequency range. There is a risk of insufficient HA amplification in the mid-frequency range when no real-ear measurements are performed.