PDF(Sci-hub)
Abstract：
This study investigated clinical care delivered to musicians in Australia by audiologists and manufacturers of musicians\' hearing protectors (MHP).
Audiologists with experience treating musicians were invited to complete a survey on their service delivery. A second survey was administered to manufacturers of MHPs.
Four manufacturers of MHP and 31 audiologists completed the surveys. Post hoc analyses were performed comparing the responses of audiologists with more versus less clinical experience; and those with and without musical training.
There was considerable variation in the audiological care provided to musicians. Only one-third of audiologists performed pure-tone audiometry prior to MHP fitting, and there was little consistency across the sample in relation to impression taking, preferred attenuation or selection of canal length. There was also significant variation in the manufacturers\' approach to MHP, each of whom provided different recommendations regarding preferred impression techniques and material viscosity.
The results of this study reveal lack of consistency across the hearing healthcare sector with respect to care of musicians\' hearing, with potential to impact upon the satisfaction with, and usage of, MHP. There is need for evidence-based, best practice guidelines and training to support clinical audiologists in providing optimal care.
Audiologists with experience treating musicians were invited to complete a survey on their service delivery. A second survey was administered to manufacturers of MHPs.
Four manufacturers of MHP and 31 audiologists completed the surveys. Post hoc analyses were performed comparing the responses of audiologists with more versus less clinical experience; and those with and without musical training.
There was considerable variation in the audiological care provided to musicians. Only one-third of audiologists performed pure-tone audiometry prior to MHP fitting, and there was little consistency across the sample in relation to impression taking, preferred attenuation or selection of canal length. There was also significant variation in the manufacturers\' approach to MHP, each of whom provided different recommendations regarding preferred impression techniques and material viscosity.
The results of this study reveal lack of consistency across the hearing healthcare sector with respect to care of musicians\' hearing, with potential to impact upon the satisfaction with, and usage of, MHP. There is need for evidence-based, best practice guidelines and training to support clinical audiologists in providing optimal care.
摘要：
这项研究调查了听力学家和音乐家听力保护器（MHP）制造商向澳大利亚音乐家提供的临床护理。
有治疗音乐家经验的听觉学家被邀请完成一项关于他们服务交付的调查。对MHP制造商进行了第二次调查。
四个MHP制造商和31个听力学家完成了调查。进行了事后分析，比较了具有更多和更少临床经验的听力学家的反应；以及有和没有音乐训练的人。
提供给音乐家的听力学护理有相当大的差异。只有三分之一的听力学家在MHP拟合之前进行了纯音测听，整个样本在印象获取方面几乎没有一致性，首选衰减或选择运河长度。制造商对MHP的方法也有很大的不同，每个人都提供了关于首选印模技术和材料粘度的不同建议。
这项研究的结果表明，在音乐家的听力护理方面，听力保健部门缺乏一致性，有可能影响满意度，和用法，MHP。有必要以证据为基础，最佳实践指南和培训，以支持临床听力学家提供最佳护理。
有治疗音乐家经验的听觉学家被邀请完成一项关于他们服务交付的调查。对MHP制造商进行了第二次调查。
四个MHP制造商和31个听力学家完成了调查。进行了事后分析，比较了具有更多和更少临床经验的听力学家的反应；以及有和没有音乐训练的人。
提供给音乐家的听力学护理有相当大的差异。只有三分之一的听力学家在MHP拟合之前进行了纯音测听，整个样本在印象获取方面几乎没有一致性，首选衰减或选择运河长度。制造商对MHP的方法也有很大的不同，每个人都提供了关于首选印模技术和材料粘度的不同建议。
这项研究的结果表明，在音乐家的听力护理方面，听力保健部门缺乏一致性，有可能影响满意度，和用法，MHP。有必要以证据为基础，最佳实践指南和培训，以支持临床听力学家提供最佳护理。
