Whispered voice test for screening for hearing impairment in adults and children: systematic review

Abstract

Objective To determine the accuracy of the whispered voice test in detecting hearing impairment in adults and children. Design Systematic review of studies of test accuracy. Data sources Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, unpublished theses, manual searching of bibliographies of known primary and review articles, and contact with authors. Study selection Two reviewers independently selected and extracted data on study characteristics, quality, and accuracy of studies. Studies were included if they had cross sectional designs, at least one of the index tests was the whispered voice test, and the reference test (audiometry) was performed on at least 80% of the participants. Data extraction Data were used to form 2×2 contingency tables with hearing impairment by audiometry as the reference standard. Data synthesis The eight studies that were found used six different techniques. The sensitivity in the four adult studies was 90% or 100% and the specificity was 70% to 87%. The sensitivity in the four childhood studies ranged from 80% to 96% and specificity ranged from 90% to 98%. Conclusion The whispered voice test is a simple and accurate test for detecting hearing impairment. There is some concern regarding the lower sensitivity in children and the overall reproducibility of the test, particularly in primary care settings. Further studies should be conducted in primary care settings to explore the influence of components of the testing procedure to optimise test sensitivity and to promote standardisation of the testing procedure.

Haloperidol Differentially Modulates Prepulse Inhibition and P50 Suppression in Healthy Humans Stratified for Low and High Gating Levels

“…The PPI data of three subjects were rejected because no distinct startle reaction could be elicited (nonresponders, mean startle amplitude on pulse-alone trials o10 mV in the presentation block relevant for %PPI calculation) and four subjects declined to continue electrophysiological recordings after completing the PPI assessment, thus resulting in 19 complete datasets (PPI, P50, CANTAB), with only PPI and CANTAB data from four subjects, and only P50 and CANTAB data from three subjects. Hearing was evaluated in all subjects, using a standard computerized whispered voice test (for a review, see Pirozzo et al, 2003). No subjects were excluded due to hearing difficulties.…”

Current practice, accuracy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the school entry hearing screen

“…loudness of the whisper, and the most appropriate use of letters, numbers or words for testing and tester). Modified from Pirozzo et al (2003), Table 2.…”

“…It is unclear how systematically the authors of the New Zealand report identified the evidence for OME screen test accuracy. 47 This review aimed to assess the accuracy (performance) of the whispered voice test for screening for hearing impairment in adults and children. 47 The quality of the review was judged to be moderate as no details of the selection of studies were provided.…”

A comparative study of smartphone based app with free field hearing for possible use as a screening test

“…Moreover, it is known to have low sensitivity and specificity. 3 Pure tone audiometry is an ideal tool for assessment of hearing. However due to its high operating cost, requirement of trained manpower and expensive infrastructure it may not be ideal as a screening test for hearing.…”

“…It lacks reproducibility, accuracy and a standard technique. 3 The ‗Gold standard' for hearing assessment is pure tone audiometry (PTA). However, the equipment is costly; moreover it requires trained manpower and expensive infrastructure to conduct the test.…”