PP1609 - Feasibility and Assessment of Tablet-Based Delivery for Behavioral Auditory Measures

This project assessed the feasibility of using tablet-based versions of behavioral suprathreshold measures. We hypothesized that tablet-administered measures are comparable to CD-administered measures of auditory processing abilities and that there are significant advantages in having tests administered and scored automatically. Participants with normal hearing completed a comprehensive suprathreshold auditory test battery using tablet-based versions of these assessments. Between-subjects analyses indicated that tablet-administered scores were comparable to published normative data for these exams. Tablet-based administration of these assessments is viable for direct clinic use and will increase patient access to behavioral measures that solidify subjective, functional complaints.  

Summary:

Rationale: Auditory processing is a phrase used to describe an individual’s ability to discern complex auditory information, beyond the level of detection (e.g., pure-tone audiometry). As the field of audiology expands to include measures ‘beyond the audiogram’, it is with increased urgency that audiologists must have an accurate and sensitive test battery to delineate between normal and abnormal abilities in persons who have clinically defined ‘normal hearing thresholds.’ For this project, we will assess the feasibility of using tablet-based versions of standardized auditory processing assessments. We hypothesize 1) That tablet-based measures are comparable to CD administered measures of auditory processing abilities and that 2) There are significant time-saving advantages to having these tests administered and scored automatically. Further reaching implications of this are that an audiologist should feel confident and empowered to complete a more comprehensive test battery to give objective measurements to a patient’s subjective, functional complaints. 

Design: Participants with normal hearing were recruited to complete a battery of auditory assessments administered using a tablet. Descriptive, proportional, and other statistical analyses were run between subjects to compare performance on tablet-based assessments to their published CD- or audiometer-administered counterparts. The specific tests included for this assessment are: The Frequency and Duration Pattern Tests (FPT/DPT); The Dichotic Digits Test (DDT); The Gaps in Noise Test (GIN); The QuickSIN; The modified QuickSIN with time-compressed speech and reverberant noise (QuickSIN TCR); The Masking Level Difference Test (MLD); and the Words in Noise Test (WIN). As a secondary part of the study, the GIN test was adapted to be administered using a manual technique. Comparisons between the two versions of the GIN tests are reported. 

Results: Published normative data was used to compare average performance for each test to results obtained from the current study. The data collected here suggest that 76-100% of the performance is falling within the published normative range for each behavioral test. The two versions of the GIN test were comparable and provided a significant time savings. 

Conclusions: Tablet-based administration is a viable alternative for direct clinic use. With tablet-based testing and scoring, the specialized training in administration and interpretation for some of these tests can be reduced. As such, assessing auditory processing abilities no longer has to be reserved for the select few who are considered “APD audiologists” who have trained in administration and interpretation, providing better access and outcomes for patients with complaints beyond what a pure-tone audiogram can identify. Finding comparable results on the two versions of the GIN test suggest that they can be used interchangeably. 

The views expressed in this abstract are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.