PubMed · 5096493
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
I Pollack. 1971. Depth of sequential auditory information processing. 3.. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1912670
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This paper describes systematic methods for measuring and controlling sound levels within a magnetic resonance scanner. The methods are illustrated by application to the acoustic noise generated by a 3 T scanner during echoplanar imaging (EPI). Across five measurement sessions, sound pressure levels at the center of the head gradient coil ranged from 122 to 131 dB SPL [123 to 132 dB(A)]. For protection against damaging noise exposure, UK and US industrial guidelines stipulate that the maximum permitted daily noise dosage is equivalent to 90 dB(A) for 8 hours, where noise dosage is a function of the level of an acoustic signal and the length of exposure to it. Without hearing protection, this equivalent level would be exceeded by less than 5 seconds of exposure to the measured levels of scanner acoustic noise. These findings highlight the importance of noise reduction and hearing protection for those exposed to the acoustic noise generated during EPI.
This review article discusses the various types of acoustic noise produced during the operation of MR systems, describes the characteristics of the acoustic noise, and presents information regarding noise control techniques. In addition, the problems related to acoustic noise for patients and healthcare workers are discussed.
There exist no systematic longitudinal studies concerning the acceptance of hearing aids in Germany. This study examines the acceptance of a hearing aid (defined by its daily/weekly use) in the management of children with persistent sensorineural hearing loss over a period of years. 35 children with monaural or binaural hearing loss were treated with a hearing aid. All children had at least a 25-dB averaged mid-frequency pure-tone hearing loss (500, 1000, 2000, 4000 Hz). The data consist of standardized parent ratings at 4 points in time over a period of nearly 30 months. Unilateral-impaired children wore their hearing aids less often than bilateral-impaired children. This effect was not significant at the beginning (P = 0.85) but increased over time. By the end the difference was significant (P = 0.004). Mild to moderate monaural hearing-impaired children accepted their hearing aids, whereas children with severe to profound hearing loss refused to wear them. Bilateral hearing-impaired children demonstrated, a priori, a better wearing acceptance that even improved with time. There was never a significant difference between boys and girls in their average wearing time. A significant correlation of age and wearing acceptance was also not observed at any time. Hearing aids are an effective treatment with high acceptance and compliance, especially by children with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The quality of acceptance of monaural hearing-impaired children needs to be studied further.