论文部分内容阅读
为制定我国纯音测听标准手法,并验证ISO/DIS6189-2提出的上行法和括号法作为标准手法的可行性,作者选择了30名具有各种听力水平的受试者,在符合有关规定的条件下分别用上行法(升5降10法)、括号法和我国有关部门曾推荐应用的下行法进行了对比测试。结果表明三种方法测得的500～4000H,四个倍频程纯音气导听阈无显著差异,但括号法耗费的时间比其它两法几乎多一倍。因此建议优先采用上行法作为我国纯音气导听阈测试的标准手法。
In order to establish the standard practice of pure tone audiometry in our country and to verify the feasibility of the upward and bracketed methods proposed by ISO / DIS6189-2 as a standard practice, the authors selected 30 subjects with various levels of hearing, Under the conditions, respectively, with the uplink method (5 5 down law), the bracketed law and the relevant departments of our country had recommended the use of the downlink method for comparative testing. The results show that the three methods measured 500 ~ 4000H, four octave pure tone guided threshold was no significant difference, but the brackets method time-consuming almost twice as many as the other two. Therefore, it is recommended to give priority to the ascending method as the standard method of pure tone gas conduction threshold test in our country.