Routine clinical distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) tests use monaural sequential presentation of primary tones. To reduce testing time, multiple DPOAEs (mDPOAEs) can be measured by stimulating the ear with two tone pairs simultaneously. Moreover, both ears can be tested at the same time with a portable device, Sentiero (PATH medical GmbH), equipped with two sound probes. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether mDPOAE measurements can be done in both ears simultaneously without mutual influence of primary tone pairs in the ipsilateral and the contralateral ear. Data were collected in 20 normal-hearing young adults. The DP-grams were obtained for seven f2- frequencies varying in the 1.5-8-kHz range with the level L2 set at 65 and 45 dB SPL, whereas the level L1 was adjusted according to the scissor paradigm. For each subject, a set of DP-gram data was collected using single- and multi-frequency presentations of the primaries for both monaural and binaural conditions. The mean DPOAE and noise levels collected with mDPOAE and binaural presentation conditions were highly reproducible when compared to those obtained with the single-frequency monaural paradigm. Thus, multi-frequency and binaural measurements could be applied to reduce DPOAE testing time considerably.

No description available.

Excerpt: Over the past 15 years, dramatic developments have occurred in the field of audiology in Poland. Three major factors have influenced the ongoing changes: development of new programs for treatment and prevention of hearing loss, a substantial improvement of qualifications of audiologists and related specialists, and the rapidly growing availability of advanced technology and treatment methods. These developments are now being accelerated by a dramatic growth in research and development in hearing science and clinical audiology in Poland.

No description available.

No description available.

When compared to their non-musician peers, adult musicians demonstrate enhanced speech-in-noise perception (Parberry-Clark et al, 2013), verbal memory (Chan et al, 1998), phonological skills (Deg & Schwarzer, 2011), and reading (Tierney & Kraus, 2013). Recent evidence from auditory brainstem responses suggests that early musical training primes neural plasticity that facilitates listening in degraded environments (Strait et al., 2012). Our study examined the hypothesis that neural enhancements, subsequent to preadolescent musical training, improves binaural speech processing and temporal processing that are known to contribute significantly to speech understanding in complex listening environments (Hirsh, 1950; Snell & Frisina, 2000). We tested middle-school aged (10 - 14 years) children with and without musical training based on years of experience (< 6 months = non-musician; > 1 year = musician) and musical aptitude (Intermediate Measures of Music Audiation; rhythm subtest) on tests of spatial listening (Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test, Dillon, 2007) and auditory temporal processing (Adaptive Test of Temporal Resolution, Lister et al., 2011). We also measured working memory and visual processing efficiency (picture pattern memory and processing speed; NIH Tool Box) to understand the potential influence of multimodality higher-order cognitive skills over modality-specific enhancements in auditory perceptual processing secondary to musical training.

No description available.

To determine the amount of importance audiologists place on various items related to their selection of a preferred hearing aid brand manufacturer. Three hundred forty-three hearing aid-dispensing audiologists rated a total of 32 randomized items by survey methodology. Principle component analysis identified seven orthogonal statistical factors of importance. In rank order, these factors were Aptitude of the Brand, Image, Cost, Sales and Speed of Delivery, Exposure, Colleague Recommendations, and Contracts and Incentives. While it was hypothesized that differences among audiologists in the importance ratings of these factors would dictate their preference for a given brand, that was not our finding. Specifically, mean ratings for the six most important factors did not differ among audiologists preferring different brands. A statistically significant difference among audiologists preferring different brands was present, however, for one factor: Contracts and Incentives. Its assigned importance, though, was always lower than that for the other six factors. Although most audiologists have a preferred hearing aid brand, differences in the perceived importance of common factors attributed to brands do not largely determine preference for a particular brand.

No description available.

No description available.