Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 28 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 296 - 301 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 İndeks Tarihi: 16-05-2021
Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks
Öz: Objective: Tuning forks (TFs) are still a valuable tool for physicians to evaluate the hearing of subjects before referring for audiological assessment. However, there have been some controversial data about the accuracy of TF tests in relation to the air-bone gap in pure tone testing. It is possible that differences in striking and holding styles might have an effect on this discrepancy. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare striking styles and placement angles of TFs. Material and Methods: C2- and C3-TFs were tuned by 15 physicians by both pisiform bone strike (PBS) and pinch with fingers (PwF). After being struck, the TFs have held 3 cm away from a microphone in parallel (PA) and perpendicular (PE) placement. Fundamental frequency and first and second overtones and their decay times were analyzed. Results: Although fundamental frequency was not statistically different between PBS and PwF, decay time of C2-TF was significantly longer by PwF (70,94 s) than by PBS (67,42 s). Further, it was found that fundamental frequencies with PA placement were higher than those with PE placement. The difference between placements for C2-TF was statistically significant. No difference was found in fundamental frequency decay time for C2-TF between PE and PA placement, while fundamental frequency decay time for C3-TF was statistically longer in PA placement. Conclusion: This study shows that placing the TFs against the ear at a PE angle shortens the sound duration. That difference could result in a negative Rinne test, even if the air-bone gap on the audiogram is not much larger. If the use of the Rinne test for case selection for stapes surgery is recommended, following the classic recommendations for TF use (PBS-PA) appears to be importan
Anahtar Kelime: Tınlatma Biçimleri ve Tutma Açısının Diyapozonların Akustik Özellikleri Üzerindeki Etkisi
Öz: Amaç: Diyapozonlar, hastaların odyoloji birimlerine yönlendi rilmeden önce işitmesinin değerlendirilmesinde hekimler tarafından hâlenkullanılan önemli bir araçtır. Ancak, diyapozon testlerinin saf ses odyo metri testinde gözlenen hava-kemik aralıklarını tespit etme başarıları hak kında literatürde tutarsız bulgular bulunmaktadır. Tınlatma ve tutmabiçimlerinin söz konusu tutarsızlık üzerinde etkisi olması mümkündür.Bu nedenle çalışmamızın amacı, diyapozonların vurma ve tutma biçim lerini karşılaştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: C2 ve C3 diyapozonlar 15hekim tarafından pisiform vuruş (PV) ve parmakla çekme (PÇ) yöntem leriyle titreştirilmiştir. Ardından, diyapozonlar mikrofondan 3 cm uzak lıkta yan ve dik olarak tutulmuştur. Temel frekans, birinci ve ikinci üsttonlar ile bunların sönme zamanları analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: Her nekadar PV ve PÇ arasında temel frekans açısından elde edilen farklar ista tistiksel olarak anlamlı olmasa da C2 diyapozonun PÇ ile sönme zama nının PV'ye göre istatistiksel olarak daha uzun süre aldığı gözlenmiştir.Dahası, yan tutuşta temel frekansın dik tutuşa göre daha yüksek olduğugörülmüş ve C2 diyapozon için elde edilen farklar istatistiksel olarak an lamlıdır. Temel frekansın sönme zamanı açısından C2 diyapozonda yanve dik tutuş arasında fark elde edilemezken, C3 diyapozonda yan tutuştaelde edilen sönme zamanı istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede uzundu.Sonuç: Çalışmamız, diyapozonu kulağa dik tutmanın uyaran süresini kı salttığını göstermiştir. Bu durum, odyogramda hava-kemik aralığının göz lenmesine rağmen Rinne testinde negatif sonuç alınmasına yol açabilir.Eğer stapes cerrahisi kararında Rinne testinin sonuçları da göz önüne alı nacaksa, diyapozonu klasik öneride de olduğu gibi PV yöntemiyle yantutmak daha doğru bir sonuç elde edilmesini sağlayacaktır.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- 1. Shea PF, Ge X, Shea JJ Jr. Stapedectomy for far-advanced otosclerosis. Am J Otol. 1999;20(4):425-9.[PubMed]
- 2. House J, Cunningham C. Otosclerosis. In: Flint P, Haughey B, Lund V, Niparko J, Richardson M, Robbins K, et al., eds. Cummings Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. Vol. 2. 5th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2010. p. 2030.
- 3. Behn A, Laszlo CA, Black D, Bryce GE. Which is mightier, the tuning fork or the bone oscillator? J Otolaryngol. 2005;34(2):135-9.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 4. Kelly EA, Bin L, Adams ME. Diagnostic accuracy of tuning fork tests for hearing loss: a systematic review. Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018;159(2):220-30.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 5. MacKechnie CA, Greenberg JJ, Gerkin RC, McCall AA, Hirsch BE, Durrant JD, et al. Rinne revisited: steel versus aluminum tuning forks. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;149(6): 907-13.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 6. Yüksel M, Kemaloğlu YK. [Tuning forks: review of history, technical properties and reliability in current ORL practice]. KBB ve BBC Dergisi. 2015;23(3):126-35.
- 7. Yüksel M, Kemaloğlu YK. Acoustic analysis of used tuning forks. J Int Adv Otol. 2017;13(2): 239-42.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 8. Butskiy O, Ng D, Hodgson M, Nunez DA. Rinne test: does the tuning fork position affect the sound amplitude at the ear? J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;24;45:21.[Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- 9. Hinchcliffe R. The clinical examination of aural function. In: Kerr A, Groves J, Booth J, eds. ScottBrown's Otolaryngology. 5th ed. London: Butterworth International; 1987. p.203-43.
- 10. Samuel J, Eitelberg E. Tuning forks: the problem of striking. J Laryngol Otol. 1989;103(1):1- 6.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 11. Stevens JR, Pfannenstiel TJ. The otologist's tuning fork examination--are you striking it correctly? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;152(3):477-9.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 12. Ashley D, Watson R. How to make a tuning fork vibrate: the humble pisiform bone. Med J Aust. 2011;195(11-12):732.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 13. Boersma P, Weenink D. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 6.0.16)[Computer program]. Retrieved May 1, 2019. 2019.
- 14. Ng M, Jackler RK. Early history of tuning-fork tests. Am J Otol. 1993;14(1):100-5.[PubMed]
- 15. Rossing TD, Russell DA, Brown DE. On the acoustics of tuning forks. Am J Phys. 1992;60(7):620.[Crossref]
- 16. Russell DA. On the sound field radiated by a tuning fork. Am J Phys. 2000;68(12):1139. [Crossref]
- 17. Chole RA, Cook GB. The rinne test for conductive deafness: a critical reappraisal. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1988;114(4): 399-403.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 18. Hinchcliffe R, Littler TS. The detection and measurement of conductive deafness. J Laryngol Otol. 1961;75:201-15.[Crossref] [PubMed]
- 19. Stwicz JA, Mowry HJ. Clinical accuracy of tuning fork tests. Laryngoscope. 1979;89(12): 1956-63.[Crossref] [PubMed
| APA | boynuegri s, YÜKSEL M, KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y (2020). Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. , 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| Chicago | boynuegri suleyman,YÜKSEL MUSTAFA,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Yusuf Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. (2020): 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| MLA | boynuegri suleyman,YÜKSEL MUSTAFA,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Yusuf Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. , 2020, ss.296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| AMA | boynuegri s,YÜKSEL M,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. . 2020; 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| Vancouver | boynuegri s,YÜKSEL M,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. . 2020; 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| IEEE | boynuegri s,YÜKSEL M,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y "Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks." , ss.296 - 301, 2020. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| ISNAD | boynuegri, suleyman vd. "Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks". (2020), 296-301. https://doi.org/10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| APA | boynuegri s, YÜKSEL M, KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y (2020). Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi, 28(3), 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| Chicago | boynuegri suleyman,YÜKSEL MUSTAFA,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Yusuf Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi 28, no.3 (2020): 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| MLA | boynuegri suleyman,YÜKSEL MUSTAFA,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Yusuf Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi, vol.28, no.3, 2020, ss.296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| AMA | boynuegri s,YÜKSEL M,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi. 2020; 28(3): 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| Vancouver | boynuegri s,YÜKSEL M,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks. Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi. 2020; 28(3): 296 - 301. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| IEEE | boynuegri s,YÜKSEL M,KEMAL KEMALOĞLU Y "Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks." Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi, 28, ss.296 - 301, 2020. 10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
| ISNAD | boynuegri, suleyman vd. "Effect of Striking Styles and Placement Angle on theAcoustic Characteristics of Tuning Forks". Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi 28/3 (2020), 296-301. https://doi.org/10.24179/kbbbbc.2020-77253 |
