Introduction Auditory brainstem response (ABR) is a key objective diagnostic method in audiology; however, the interpretation of recordings – especially estimating hearing thresholds – is challenging for novices. The aim of this preliminary descriptive study was to document the learning process of novices in ABR threshold interpretation in preparation for the ABR.AI project. Material and methods Seven students with varying levels of baseline theoretical knowledge participated in the training. The program consisted of a multi-stage cycle including theoretical lectures, individual analysis of ABR recordings, independent practice with available expert consultation, and case-based discussions. The students’ hearing threshold estimations were compared with expert assessments across three clinical datasets (115–122 cases each). Results were presented as the percentage of full agreement (0 dB difference), minor discrepancies (≤ 10 dB), and large discrepancies (> 10 dB) relative to the expert’s assessment. Results Across the three training stages, mean full agreement with the expert increased from 55% (Set 1) to 60% (Set 3), while major discrepancies decreased from 9% to 6%. Despite individual differences in learning dynamics, the majority of participants demonstrated a consolidation of interpretive skills and a reduction in large diagnostic errors. Most deviations were ≤ 10 dB, indicating that discrepancies were generally small and clinically acceptable. Conclusions This preliminary descriptive study demonstrated that multi-stage, expert-guided training was associated with an improvement in ABR threshold estimation accuracy, and most importantly, with a clinically meaningful reduction in large discrepancies (>10 dB) from the expert’s assessment. These findings highlight the importance of structured, feedback-based learning in the education of audiology professionals.
Introduction This study aimed to evaluate the noise immunity level (NIL) of the booth-free KUDUwave™ audiometer and compare the subjective comfort of its headphones against a conventional screening audiometer under simulated noise conditions, in order to determine its suitability for hearing screening in resource-limited settings. Material and methods 30 normal-hearing adults (aged 20–25 years) participated in a repeated-measures crossover study. Pure-tone airand bone-conduction thresholds were obtained under quiet and background noise conditions using the KUDUwave audiometer and a conventional audiometer from Interacoustics. Three types of noise were presented: broadband noise (BBN), speech-shaped noise (SSN), and eight-talker babble (8-TB). In addition, the subjective comfort associated with each audiometer’s headset was evaluated. Results Baseline air-conduction (AC) thresholds were comparable between the two audiometers, whereas bone-conduction (BC) thresholds were significantly lower with the KUDUwave, likely due to the occlusion effect. Across all noise conditions, the KUDUwave demonstrated higher NILs than the conventional audiometer, indicating greater resistance to ambient noise. In AC testing, NILs were lowest at low frequencies and highest at mid frequencies, with 8-TB producing greater masking effects than BBN and SSN. However, participants reported lower comfort with the KUDUwave headset compared to the conventional audiometer. Conclusions The KUDUwave audiometer demonstrated greater noise immunity than the conventional device, indicating enhanced resistance to ambient noise. These findings suggest its potential suitability for hearing screening in non–sound-treated, community-based environments. However, its real-world utility and practical advantages in such settings need to be further validated through field-based studies.
Subjective tinnitus is common yet poorly understood, and existing models do not fully explain its clinical diversity. This article presents a mechanistic hypothesis, based on existing literature, in which tinnitus may emerge not only from reduced auditory input due to inner ear injury but also from increased activity of the middle ear muscles, which may ultimately increase extracochlear, largely somatosensory, input to the cochlear nucleus. In this framework, auditory deafferentation is necessary but insufficient on its own. We further hypothesise that, in some clinical contexts, somatosensory drive may be amplified by excessive stimulation of putative middle ear mechanoreceptors (MeRs). This stimulation may originate from muscle vibration (tremor) within the tympanic cavity, associated with heightened activity of the stapedius, tensor tympani, and tensor veli palatini muscles. Clinical situations such as loud-noise exposure, temporomandibular disorders, cervical dysfunction, and ear canal irritation may be interpreted within this framework as diverse triggers converging on enhanced middle ear muscle activity and mechanosensory overstimulation. Although hypothetical, the model yields testable predictions. Functional neuroimaging could reveal abnormal activation of somatosensory cortical areas in tinnitus not directly related to acoustic trauma; middle ear muscle activity could be assessed in animal models using electromyography; and refined impedance-based measurements may help detect and characterise middle ear vibratory phenomena. Clinically, inter-individual variability in the stapedius reflex should modulate transient tinnitus and aural fullness after exposure to loud noise. By integrating auditory deafferentation, somatosensory modulation, and middle ear biomechanics, this hypothesis aims to guide future experimental work and therapeutic strategies.
Introduction Central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD) involves deficits in the processing of auditory information within the central nervous system. Children with CAPD remain undiagnosed in Nepal due to a lack of assessment tools. Developing a screening tool for CAPD in the Nepali language is needed to identify at-risk children. Material and methods Fisher’s Auditory Problems Checklist (FAPC) and the Children’s Auditory Performance Checklist (CHAPS) were translated into Nepali using the translation/back-translation method. The questionnaires were administered to 100 students in the Kathmandu valley using cluster sampling. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability analysis were undertaken, and validity was measured in terms of face validity. Results Cronbach’s alpha was 0.761 for FAPC and 0.949 for CHAPS. All questions received a rating of > 4 from 5 audiologists, confirming their adequacy in terms of content, clarity, and intended purpose. Pearson’s r-value of 0.998 for CHAPS and 0.775 for FAPC was obtained in test–retest reliability analysis. Conclusions The Nepali versions of Fisher’s checklist and CHAPS demonstrated good internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and face validity, supporting their use as preliminary CAPD screening tools.
Introduction The aim of the study was to compare the incidence and mortality in Poland from malignant tumors of the nasal cavity and middle ear (ICD-C30) with other head and neck cancers over the years 2000 to 2022. Material and methods Incidence and death due to malignant tumors in Poland was based on data from the Polish National Cancer Registry (KRN) over the years 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2022. As a benchmark, we compare worldwide rates from the latest GLOBOCAN estimates developed by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and distributed as Cancer Today in the Global Cancer Observatory. Results Based on figures from the Polish National Cancer Registry for the years 2000 and 2022, the incidence of malignant tumors of the nasal cavity and middle ear in the country has increased by 18.1%, with an increase of 15.5% in women and 20.4% in men. In terms of deaths from such tumors, however, the same source showed an overall increase of 33.3%, which comprised 56.2% for women and 20.7% for men. Conclusions A malignant tumor of the nasal cavity and middle ear (ICD-C30) is the 20th most common cancer of the head and neck. The Polish National Cancer Registry from 2022 shows that ICD-C30 is the 19th most common cancer of the head and neck in terms of deaths, comparable with malignant tumor of the gums (ICD-C03). In terms of incidence, the most common head and neck cancer based on the same source is thyroid cancer (ICD-C73), and in terms of deaths, laryngeal cancer (ICD-C32).
