Threshold of Hearing by Bone Conduction<i>A Contribution to International Standardization</i>

Richter, Utz; Brinkmann, Klaus

doi:10.3109/01050398109076186

Cited by 25 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 ), both the ipsilateral temporal region and mastoid showed lower BC thresholds by about 10 dB than stimulation at the forehead. These results correspond well with the findings by Richter and Brinkmann [1981] who described a difference between BC thresholds with forehead and mastoid stimulation of 1 11 dB. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) has reported that adult behavioral thresholds measured with forehead stimulation are higher than those for mastoid placement of stimulation, by 14.0, 8.5, 11.5, 8.0 dB at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz, respectively.…”

Section: Subjective Bc Hearing Thresholdssupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Similar findings were also shown in the work by Dunlap et al [1988] for dried cadaver heads, in the work by Stenfelt et al [2005] for heads from cadavers, and in the work by Durrant and Hyre [1993] for live subjects with normal hearing. Richter and Brinkmann [1981] showed that BC thresholds with stimulation at the ipsilateral mastoid were lower than BC thresholds with stimulation at the forehead for the conventional audiometric test frequency range.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bone Conduction Thresholds and Skull Vibration Measured on the Teeth during Stimulation at Different Sites on the Human Head

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vibratory auditory stimulation or bone conduction (BC) reaches the inner ear through both osseous and non-osseous structures of the head, but the contribution of the different pathways of BC is still unclear. In this study, BC thresholds in response to stimulation at several different locations including the eye were assessed, while the magnitudes of skull bone vibrations were measured on the front teeth in human subjects with either normal hearing on both sides or unilateral deafness with normal hearing on the other side. The BC thresholds with stimulation at the ipsilateral mastoid and ipsilateral temporal region were lower than the BC thresholds with stimulation at the other sites, as reported by previous works. The lower thresholds with stimulation at the ipsilateral mastoid and ipsilateral temporal region matched higher amplitudes of skull bone vibrations measured on the teeth, but only at frequencies below 1 kHz. With stimulation at the eye, the thresholds were significantly higher than those with stimulation at the bony sites in the frequency range of 0.25–4 kHz. While skull bone vibrations as measured on the teeth during stimulation at the eye were low for low frequencies, significant bone vibrations were measured at 3 and 4 kHz, indicating different pathways for BC for either the soft tissue or bony site stimulation. This finding contradicts a straightforward relationship between vibrations of the skull bones and BC hearing thresholds.

show abstract

Section: Subjective Bc Hearing Thresholdssupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone Conduction Thresholds and Skull Vibration Measured on the Teeth during Stimulation at Different Sites on the Human Head

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the cranial midline location, the comparison of the SVIN SPV measured at the frontal location (Fz), vertex (Vx), bregma, occipital, and sub-occipital locations at 100 and 60 Hz in 15 UVL patients did not show significant differences (46). BCV applied to the frontal location is considerably less efficient than mastoid vibration in eliciting SVIN (26) and for vibration transfer to the promontory (54–56). …”

Section: Methods—practical Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Skull Vibration-Induced Nystagmus Test of Vestibular Function—A Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 100-Hz bone-conducted vibration applied to either mastoid induces instantaneously a predominantly horizontal nystagmus, with quick phases beating away from the affected side in patients with a unilateral vestibular loss (UVL). The same stimulus in healthy asymptomatic subjects has little or no effect. This is skull vibration-induced nystagmus (SVIN), and it is a useful, simple, non-invasive, robust indicator of asymmetry of vestibular function and the side of the vestibular loss. The nystagmus is precisely stimulus-locked: it starts with stimulation onset and stops at stimulation offset, with no post-stimulation reversal. It is sustained during long stimulus durations; it is reproducible; it beats in the same direction irrespective of which mastoid is stimulated; it shows little or no habituation; and it is permanent—even well-compensated UVL patients show SVIN. A SVIN is observed under Frenzel goggles or videonystagmoscopy and recorded under videonystagmography in absence of visual-fixation and strong sedative drugs. Stimulus frequency, location, and intensity modify the results, and a large variability in skull morphology between people can modify the stimulus. SVIN to 100 Hz mastoid stimulation is a robust response. We describe the optimum method of stimulation on the basis of the literature data and testing more than 18,500 patients. Recent neural evidence clarifies which vestibular receptors are stimulated, how they cause the nystagmus, and why the same vibration in patients with semicircular canal dehiscence (SCD) causes a nystagmus beating toward the affected ear. This review focuses not only on the optimal parameters of the stimulus and response of UVL and SCD patients but also shows how other vestibular dysfunctions affect SVIN. We conclude that the presence of SVIN is a useful indicator of the asymmetry of vestibular function between the two ears, but in order to identify which is the affected ear, other information and careful clinical judgment are needed.

show abstract

“…Although the gain and output of BAHAs can be measured with the specially developed ''Skull Simulator'' [11], this was not appropriate for the present transcutaneous application. Instead, the ''Artificial mastoid'' was used [12]. Gain and maximum output were determined in a sound-field test setting with the conventional bone-conduction device (the Oticon E 300 P, tone in broad band position, output unlimited), plus the BAHA Classic and the BAHA Compact on headbands.…”

Section: Electro-acoustical Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%