ABSTRACT
Purpose
To verify the correlation of different tonal means (tritonal, quadritonal and octanol) with the Percentage Index of Speech Recognition and with hearing disadvantage.
Methods
56 subjects participated in the study, distributed into two groups, with descendant audiometric configuration: Subjects with tritonal average equal to or less than 25 dB HL(G1) and subjects with a tritone average worse than 25 dB HL(G2), being matched for sex and age (p=0.544). All were safe by Threshold Tone Audiometry, Speech Recognition Percentage Index (IPRF) with a list of keywords, Acoustic I Measures and the Elearing Handicap Inventory for Adults. The correlation analysis was performed between the averages, of three frequencies (M3), of four frequencies (M4) and of eight frequencies (M8) with the IPRF and with auditory disadvantage, using the Spearman correlation test, the significance level being considered <0.05 (5%).
Results
There was a statistically significant correlation of the IPRF with M8 , for G1, and the IPRF with M4 and M8, for G2. There was a tendency towards significance, both for G1 and G2, in relation to M8 when correlated with hearing impairment, demonstrating that analyzing the eight frequencies of the audiogram (frequencies higher than 4000 Hz) seems to allow a greater understanding of the patient’s hearing handicap.
Conclusion
There was a statistically significant correlation between the IPRF and M8, in both groups, denoting a reduction in the performance of the IPRF, with an increase in the mean, considering the eight frequencies. M8 better reflected the hearing disadvantage caused by the hearing loss in G1.
Keywords:
Speech perception; Hearing loss; Audiometry; Adults; Speech acoustics