Functional Otology 1955
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-40154-5_8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tuning Forks and Bars

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 25 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another issue that has to be addressed is the variability between Weber test results as a function of tuning fork frequency. Historically, the 512 Hz tuning fork became so popular for audiometric tests, because at this frequency, the ideal balance between tactile vibration and time of tone decay is obtained (21), even though bone conduction is better at lower frequencies. The clinical accuracy of three different tuning fork frequencies (256, 512, and 1024 Hz) among SNHL patients found to be directly proportional to the frequency used: the higher the tuning fork frequency, the more accurate results obtained (14).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another issue that has to be addressed is the variability between Weber test results as a function of tuning fork frequency. Historically, the 512 Hz tuning fork became so popular for audiometric tests, because at this frequency, the ideal balance between tactile vibration and time of tone decay is obtained (21), even though bone conduction is better at lower frequencies. The clinical accuracy of three different tuning fork frequencies (256, 512, and 1024 Hz) among SNHL patients found to be directly proportional to the frequency used: the higher the tuning fork frequency, the more accurate results obtained (14).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%