Assessing the accuracy and reliability of application-based audiometry for hearing evaluation

• Published in: Scientific reports Vol. 14; no. 1; p. 7359
• Main Authors: Lee, Seung Yeol, Seo, Hee Won, Jung, Seon Min, Lee, Seung Hwan, Chung, Jae Ho
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 28.03.2024; Nature Publishing Group; Nature Portfolio
• Subjects: 692/308; 692/699; 692/700; Accuracy; Audiometry; Audiometry, Pure-Tone - methods; Auditory Threshold; Deafness; Ears & hearing; Hearing; Hearing loss; Hearing Loss - diagnosis; Hearing tests; Humanities and Social Sciences; Humans; multidisciplinary; Performance assessment; Reproducibility of Results; Science; Science (multidisciplinary); Smartphones
• ISSN: 2045-2322; 2045-2322
• DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-57944-9

Pure-tone audiometry (PTA) is the gold standard for assessing hearing loss. However, traditional PTA tests require specialized equipment, trained personnel, and a soundproof environment. Recently, smartphone-based PTA tests have been developed as an alternative method for hearing assessment. The aim of this study was to validate the accuracy and reliability of a smartphone application-based audiometry test. This study was conducted to assess the performance of application-based audiometry from November 2021 to January 2022. Pure-tone thresholds were measured using a smartphone application-based PTA test and compared with results obtained using a traditional audiometer in a sound-treated booth. The smartphone application used in this study was the "Care4Ear (Care4ear, version 1.0.6, MIJ Co., Ltd.)". Hearing thresholds less than 35 dB HL were classified as group A, 35-64 dB HL as group B, and 65 dB HL or greater as group C for the classification of hearing levels. We evaluated the accuracy of smartphone audiometry for each group and compared the results of frequency-specific hearing tests. Additionally, we examined the results of smartphone audiometry in individuals (n = 27) with asymmetric hearing loss. Seventy subjects completed both conventional audiometry and smartphone application-based hearing tests. Among the ears assessed, 55.7% were classified as group A, while 25.7% and 18.6% were classified as group B and group C, respectively. The average hearing threshold obtained from conventional pure-tone audiometry was 37.7 ± 25.2 dB HL, whereas the application-based hearing test yielded thresholds of 21.0 ± 23.0 dB HL. A significant correlation (r = 0.69, p  < 0.01) was found between the average hearing thresholds obtained from the application-based and conventional pure-tone audiometry tests. The application-based test achieved a 97.4% hit rate for classifying hearing thresholds as class A, but lower rates of 22.2% for class B and 38.5% for class C. Notably, a discrepancy was observed between the hearing threshold measured by the application and the conventional audiometry for the worse ear with asymmetric hearing. The smartphone-based audiometry is a feasible method for hearing evaluation especially in persons with normal hearing. In cases of hearing loss or asymmetric hearing loss, the results of the application-based audiometry may be inaccurate, limiting its diagnostic utility.