Sudden hearing loss is a common presentation to ENT. In the authors’ practice, patients often wait many weeks for formal hearing testing. This study aimed to assess whether a tablet-based hearing test, hearTest, could aid clinical decision-making within secondary care ENT.

This was a multi-centre, prospective, non-randomised study to assess the feasibility, usability and accuracy of hearTest.

In the sample, hearTest was shown to be an acceptable method of testing for hearing loss by both patients and clinicians. The 0.5–4 kHz range had an average clinical agreement rate of 95.1 per cent when compared with formal pure tone audiometry, deeming it an accurate test to diagnose hearing loss.

The authors propose that hearTest can be used within ENT as a clinical decision support tool when manual audiometry is not immediately available. Within the authors’ practice, hearTest is used to aid diagnosis and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

Millions of people across the world suffer from disabling hearing loss. Appropriate interventions lead to improved speech and language skills, educational advancement, and improved social integration. A major limitation to improving care is identifying those with disabling hearing loss in low-resource countries.

This review article summarises information on currently available hearing screening platforms and technology available from published reports and the authors’ personal experiences of hearing loss identification in low-resource areas of the world. The paper reviews the scope and capabilities of portable hearing screening platforms, including the pros and cons of each technology and how they have been utilised in low-resource environments.

Portable hearing screening tools are readily available to assess hearing loss in low-resource areas. Each technology has advantages and limitations that should be considered when identifying the optimal methods to assess needs in each country.

Similar to visual hallucinations in visually impaired patients, auditory hallucinations are often suggested to occur in adults with hearing impairment. However, research on this association is limited. This observational, cross-sectional study tested whether auditory hallucinations are associated with hearing impairment, by assessing their prevalence in an adult population with various degrees of objectified hearing impairment.

Hallucination presence was determined in 1007 subjects aged 18–92, who were referred for audiometric testing to the Department of ENT-Audiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. The presence and severity of hearing impairment were calculated using mean air conduction thresholds from the most recent pure tone audiometry.

Out of 829 participants with hearing impairment, 16.2% (n = 134) had experienced auditory hallucinations in the past 4 weeks; significantly more than the non-impaired group [5.8%; n = 10/173; p < 0.001, odds ratio 3.2 (95% confidence interval 1.6–6.2)]. Prevalence of auditory hallucinations significantly increased with categorized severity of impairment, with rates up to 24% in the most profoundly impaired group (p < 0.001). The corrected odds of hallucination presence increased 1.02 times for each dB of impairment in the best ear. Auditory hallucinations mostly consisted of voices (51%), music (36%), and doorbells or telephones (24%).

Our findings reveal that auditory hallucinations are common among patients with hearing impairment, and increase with impairment severity. Although more research on potential confounding factors is necessary, clinicians should be aware of this phenomenon, by inquiring after hallucinations in hearing-impaired patients and, conversely, assessing hearing impairment in patients with auditory hallucinations, since it may be a treatable factor.

Tinnitus is a disturbing symptom and is often the main reason for otology referral. It is usually associated with hearing loss of varying aetiology, and is thought to begin in the cochlea, with later abnormal central activity. We hypothesise that tinnitus without hearing loss may be caused by central and subcortical abnormalities and altered outer hair cell function.

To compare the auditory brainstem responses, middle latency responses and otoacoustic emissions in normal-hearing individuals with and without tinnitus.

The audiological test results of 25 normal hearing subjects with tinnitus (age 18–45 years) were determined, and compared with those of a control group.

A statistically significant difference was found between study group tinnitus ears vs control group ears, as regards wave I latency prolongation, shortening of wave V and absolute I–III and I–V interpeak latency, enlargement of wave Na and Pa amplitude, and distortion product and transient evoked otoacoustic emission signal-to-noise ratios. There was no statistically significant difference between unilateral vs bilateral tinnitus ears.

The pathogenesis and optimum management of tinnitus are still unclear. It often occurs with primary ear disease, usually associated with hearing loss, but may occur in patients with normal hearing. Observed changes in auditory brainstem and middle latency responses indicate central auditory alterations. Tinnitus involves both peripheral and central activity, and complete audiological and neurophysiological investigation is required. Management should be based on both audiological and neurophysiological findings.

Conscious and deceptive exaggeration of hearing loss is termed pseudohypacusis. Even though the Stenger test has been used in the management of pseudohypacusis for almost a century, its sensitivity, specificity and predictive values for unilateral pseudohypacusis have not previously been reported, to our best knowledge. We investigated the efficiency of the Stenger test in detecting unilateral pseudohypacusis, accepting auditory brainstem response testing as the ‘gold standard’.

Candidates with questionable profound or total hearing loss were enrolled in the study. Pure tone audiometry, speech and tonal Stenger tests, and click test auditory brainstem response measurement were performed. Accepting auditory brainstem response testing as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the Stenger test for unilateral, profound pseudohypacusis were assessed.

Two hundred military candidates were enrolled in the study. The sensitivity and specificity of the Stenger test in verifying unilateral, profound hearing loss were 99.4 and 70 per cent, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values of the test were 87.5 and 98.4 per cent, respectively.

The Stenger test is widely used for the evaluation of unilateral or asymmetrical pseudohypacusis. In our opinion, it is a powerfully reliable test. More difficult cases require objective electrophysiological testing to verify functional hearing loss and to exclude specific diagnoses that may imitate pseudohypacusis.

For various medico-legal and financial reasons, some patients may clinically demonstrate an exaggerated hearing loss that varies in degree, nature and laterality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether multi-channel auditory steady-state response measurement can be used as an objective test of auditory thresholds in adults with sensorineural hearing loss.

This was a prospective, comparative, experimental research design study conducted in an academic medical centre. From January to June 2007, 142 subjects (284 ears) with varying degrees of sensorineural hearing loss were included. Four commonly used frequencies (500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz) were evaluated. Both pure tone thresholds and multi-channel auditory steady-state response thresholds were obtained for each ear in all subjects. The correlation of auditory steady-state response thresholds and pure tone thresholds was assessed. The time taken for multi-channel auditory steady-state response testing was also recorded.

Results for multi-channel auditory steady-state response thresholds and pure tone thresholds were compared for each test frequency. A difference of less than 15 dB was found in 71 per cent of patients, while a difference of less than 20 dB was found in 83 per cent. Correlation between auditory steady-state response thresholds and pure tone thresholds, expressed as the correlation coefficient (r), was 0.89, 0.95, 0.96 and 0.97 at 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz, respectively. The strength of the relationship between auditory steady-state response thresholds and pure tone thresholds increased with increasing frequency and increasing degree of hearing loss. The recorded auditory steady-state response thresholds were used to calculate regression lines predicting pure tone threshold results. The mean estimated pure tone thresholds calculated from these regression lines were all within 10 dB of the actual recorded pure tone thresholds. The average multi-channel auditory steady-state response test duration was 42 minutes per patient.

Measurement of multi-channel auditory steady-state response could be a powerful, convenient electro-physiological examination with which to objectively certify clinical hearing impairment in adults.