GSI- AMTAS: Comparing Automated to Manual Audiometric Test Results

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the GSI: AMTAS automated audiometry system to manual audiometry when obtaining air conduction pure tone thresholds, Speech Reception Thresholds, and Word Recognition Scores in an adult population.Methods: Thirty subjects, most of whom had normal hearing, had a comprehensive hearing evaluation completed using the automated AMTAS protocol and a manual protocol that was administered by a graduate student clinician in an Audiology Doctoral Program. Results: Pure tone air conduction thresholds, speech reception threshold, and word recognition scores from both protocols were analyzed via analysis of variance (ANOVA). Puretone air conduction thresholds were similar when obtained using both protocols. Speech reception threshold and word recognition score comparisons showed statistically significant differences between the manual protocol and the AMTAS protocol, with lower SRTs and poorer WRS for the AMTAS. These differences were likely the result of protocol differences. Conclusion: In this adult population, pure tone air conduction thresholds, speech reception thresholds and word recognition scores were clinically similar when obtained using the automated GSI: AMTAS system and manual audiometry. Although the AMTAS system appears to be a good gatekeeper, further studies are needed to determine if these results generalize to other clinical populations.