Do eyeglasses and palatal prostheses affect the results of the Weber test?

Authors

  • Yavuz Atar Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
  • Ziya Salturk Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
  • Guler Berkiten Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
  • Tolgar Lutfi Kumral Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
  • Yavuz Uyar Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
  • Guven Yildirim Giresun University Medical School, ENT Clinic, Giresun, Turkey
  • Imran Aydogdu Bahcelievler Government Hospital ENT Clinic Istanbul, Turkey
  • Mehmet Onder Dogan Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
  • Huseyin Sari Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
  • Enis Ekincioglu Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2454-5929.ijohns20190755

Keywords:

Tuning fork, Weber test, Rinne test

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to analyze the possible effects of eyeglasses and palatal prostheses on the results of the Weber tuning fork test.

Methods: We enrolled 96 patients diagnosed with unilateral conductive-type hearing loss. All were aged between 18 and 65 years. Group 1 was composed of 48 patients with eyeglasses and group 2 included 48 patients with palatal prostheses. All patients underwent the weber tuning fork test with and without their eyeglasses and prostheses, and the results were compared. Weber tests were performed using 256 Hz and 512 Hz tuning forks.  

Results: No significant between-group difference was apparent (both p>0.05).

Conclusions Neither eyeglasses nor palatal prostheses significantly affected the results of the Weber test.

Author Biography

Yavuz Atar, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Associate Professor

References

Bickerton RC, Barr GS. The origin of the tuning fork. J R Soc Med. 1987;80:771-3.

Grant JD. Simplified method of determining percentage of actual hearing-power in Tuning-fork tests. Proc R Soc Med. 1934;27:419-24.

Burkey JM, Lippy WH, Schuring AG, Rizer FM. Clinical utility of the 512-Hz Rinne tuning fork test. Am J Otol. 1998;19:59-62.

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;45:21.

Stevens JR, Pfannenstiel TJ. The otologist's tuning fork examination-are you striking it correctly? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;152:477-9.

Barnes WH. The tuning fork tests. J Natl Med Assoc. 1922;14:95-8.

Sunar O, Devranoglu I, Umul M. Weber testinin klinik degeri. Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1987;25:148-54.

John S, Turner JR. The ear and auditory system. In: Walker HK, Hall WD, Hurst JW, edt. Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations. 3rd ed. Chapter 126. Boston: Butterworths; 1990.

McBride P. The Tuning-Fork in diagnosis of lesions of the internal ear. Br Med J. 1886;1:688.

Downloads

Published

2019-02-23

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 2 (2019): March-April 2019

Section

Original Research Articles