Clinical Validity of hearScreen(tm) Smartphone Hearing Screening for School Children
Objectives: The study aimed to determine the validity of a smartphone hearing screening technology (hearScreen(tm) compared with conventional screening audiometry in terms of (1) sensitivity and specificity, (2) referral rate, and (3) test time. Design: One thousand and seventy school age children in grades 1 to 3 (8 1.1 average years) were recruited from five public schools. Children were screened twice, once using conventional audiometry and once with the smartphone hearing screening. Screening was conducted in a counterbalanced sequence, alternating initial screen between conventional or smartphone hearing screening. Results: No statistically significant difference in performance between techniques was noted, with smartphone screening demonstrating equivalent sensitivity (75.0% and specificity (98.5% to conventional screening audiometry. While referral rates were lower with the smartphone screening (3.2 vs. 4.6% it was not significantly different (p 0.05) Smartphone screening (hearScreen(tm) was 12.3% faster than conventional screening. Conclusion: Smartphone hearing screening using the hearScreen(tm) application is accurate and time efficient.
Ear and hearing