感音神经性听力损失患者舒适阈与不适阈研究  

Most Comfortable Levels and Uncomfortable Levels of Patients with Sensorineural Hearing Loss

作　　者：胡旭君[1] 黄方园[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江中医药大学听力与言语科学学院,杭州310000

出　　处：《听力学及言语疾病杂志》2010年第5期456-458,共3页Journal of Audiology and Speech Pathology

摘　　要：目的探讨纯音测听上升法与下降法对感音神经性听力损失患者舒适阈、不适阈的影响。方法对57名(111耳)感音神经性听力损失患者进行纯音测试测得听阈,然后随机将受试者分为两组,进行1 000 Hz纯音舒适阈测试。一组受试者先用上升法(ascending)测试其舒适阈,再进行下降法测试;另一组则相反,最后进行不适阈测试。分别比较两组以上升-下降法测得的MCL之差值(A-D差)。结果轻度听力损失患者平均MCL为64.83±7.82 dB HL,A-D差为5.67±5.94 dB,平均UCL为94.67±8.76 dB HL;中度听力损失患者平均MCL为66.56±8.80 dB HL,A-D差为5.75±4.32 dB,平均UCL为91.60±9.84 dB HL;中重度听力损失患者平均MCL为77.15±9.56 dB HL,A-D差为4.86±4.22 dB,平均UCL为98.89±9.11 dB HL;重度听力损失平均MCL为89.64±8.65 dB HL,A-D差为3.57±4.76 dB,平均UCL为106.43±9.00 dB HL。结论听力损失程度越重,MCL、UCL越高。上升法较下降法测得的MCL低。Objective To test most comforlable level（MCL） and uncomforlable level（UCL） of patients sensorineural hearing loss and to establish normal data for clinic use.The effects of ascending versus descending approaches to testing MCL were measured in order to assess the appropriateness of each procedure.Methods To measure 1 000 Hz pure tone audiometry on 57（111 ears） patients with sensorineural hearing loss.They were randomly divided into two groups： one ascending approach first,and then the descending approach and the other descending first and then the ascending approach.Results The mean MCL on mild hearing impairment was 64.83±7.82 with A-D 5.67±5.94 dB and mean UCL was 94.67±8.76 dB HL.For moderate hearing impairment,the mean was 66.56±8.80 dB HL and 91.60±9.84 dB HL,respectively with A-D 5.75±4.32 dB;for moderate-to-serious hearing impairment,the mean was 77.15±9.56 dB HL and 98.89±9.11 dB HL respectively with A-D 4.86±4.22 dB;for profound hearing loss,the number was 89.64±8.65 dB HL and 106.43±9.00 dB HL with A-D 3.57±4.76 dB.Conclusion The MCL and UCL increased with shifting hearing loss.There were significant differences between the ascending and descending approaches.

关 键 词：感音神经性听力损失 舒适阈 不适阈 上升法 下降法 

分 类 号：R764.03[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]