论文部分内容阅读
听阈测定中,工具的不同是阈值变化的主要原因之一。目前,通用的测听工具是纯音听力计和自描听力计。作者从115例、年龄为25～63岁的男性船厂工人的听闹测定中,进行了这二种听力计的阈值对比。采用的纯音听力计的Madsen OB 60,耳机为配有MX-41/AR外垫的TDH-39M型。自描听力计为Demlar 120型,耳机为配有上述外垫的TDH-49 P型。二种听力计分别按ISOR 389(1964)和ANSI S 3.6(1969)标准校定,但经同一仿真耳校正,其精确度与稳定性均优于±1分贝。衰减范围:纯音听力计从+10分贝起以5分
In hearing threshold measurement, the difference of tools is one of the main reasons for the threshold change. At present, common audiometry tools are pure tone audiometer and self-scanning audiometer. The authors compared the thresholds for these two types of audiometry from a hearing survey of 115 shipyard workers aged 25-63. The Madsen OB 60 uses a pure tone audiometer and the headset is a TDH-39M with an MX-41 / AR pad. The self-scanning audiometer is a Demlar 120 model and the headphone is a TDH-49 P type with the above outer pad. The two types of audiometers were calibrated to ISOR 389 (1964) and ANSI S 3.6 (1969), respectively, but their accuracy and stability were better than ± 1 dB with the same ear simulation. Attenuation range: pure tone audiometer from +10 dB to 5 points