Patent Application
20220327951
The subject matter disclosed herein is generally directed to a software-based simulator to provide speech and hearing students the ability to perform hearing screening training using a realistic interface similar to devices used to perform these tests, which provides results for Otoscopy, Tympanometry, and Audiometry testing, and assesses the students responses for correctness.
There are over three hundred (300) institutions offering degree programs in audiology, speech-language pathology, and speech, language, and hearing science. The 2014 CSD Education Survey indicates that over 38,000 students were enrolled in undergraduate Communication Sciences & Disorders majors, with over 16,000 enrolled Master's Speech-Language Pathology students, and over 2500 Audiology clinical doctorate students. Both of these fields are predicted to experience significant growth over the next 10 years.
Speech-language pathologists conduct hearing screening tests to attempt to identify hearing problems early. If a potential problem is identified, the subject is sent for a full hearing evaluation. However, with respect to the current state of the art, there is no existing system to provide training except using physical devices. This is expensive and does not address remote learners. Further, systems that must be installed on a computer are also inconvenient and possibly limiting in their scope and reach to those being trained.
Accordingly, it is an object of the present disclosure to provide a web-based application, which would significantly improve the usability and reach of the system to prospective trainees.
Citation or identification of any document in this application is not an admission that such a document is available as prior art to the present disclosure.
The above objectives are accomplished according to the present disclosure by providing in one instance, an audiology simulator. The audiology simulator may include an otoscopy component to provide a visual representation of at least one ear, a tympanometry measuring component to simulate measurement of eardrum movement in the at least one ear; and an audiometer component to simulate measuring hearing in the at least one ear; and wherein the otoscopy component, the tympanometry measuring component, and the audiometer component replicate administering and interpreting a hearing test given to a subject. Further, the audiology simulator may provide at least one result of an operator's performance using the audiology simulator. Still, the audiology simulator may enable cross-sectional data analysis across multiple users to compare different users' results using the audiology simulator. Moreover, the audiology simulator may include a graphical interface. Yet again, the graphical interface may provide at least one display output that includes at least one otoscope image, at least one tympanogram, and at least one audiometer chart. Again yet, the audiology simulator may be web-based. Further again, the audiology simulator may include a subject information section providing information about the subject. Still again further, the audiology simulator may provide sensory input to a user via interactive objects to confirm an action performed by the audiology simulator. Still moreover, the audiology simulator may include an avatar representing the subject being tested by the audiology simulator wherein the avatar provides visual cues to a user to show the avatar receiving sensory input from the audiology simulator.
In a further instance, the current disclosure may provide an auditory training simulation method. The method may include providing an audiology simulator that may include an otoscopy component to provide a visual representation of at least one ear; a tympanometry measuring component to measure eardrum movement in the at least one ear; and an audiometer component to measure hearing in the at least one ear; and replicating administering and interpreting a hearing test given to a subject via the otoscopy component, the tympanometry measuring component, and the audiometer component. Still further, the method may include providing via the audiology simulator at least one result of an operator's performance using the audiology simulator. Yet again, the method may, enable, via the audiology simulator, cross-sectional data analysis across multiple users to compare different users' results using the audiology simulator. Further yet, the method may include providing a graphical interface to interact with a user. Moreover, the method may provide via the graphical interface at least one display output that includes at least one otoscope image, at least one tympanogram, and at least one audiometer chart. Yet further, the method may provide the audiology simulator as a web-based platform. Still further, the method may provide a subject information section that provides information about the subject. Even further, the method may provide sensory input, via the audiology simulator, to a user via interactive objects to confirm an action performed by the audiology simulator. Still even further, the method may, via the audiology simulator, presented an avatar representing the subject being tested by the audiology simulator wherein the avatar provides visual cues to a user to show the avatar receiving sensory input from the audiology simulator.
These and other aspects, objects, features, and advantages of the example embodiments will become apparent to those having ordinary skill in the art upon consideration of the following detailed description of example embodiments.
An understanding of the features and advantages of the present disclosure will be obtained by reference to the following detailed description that sets forth illustrative embodiments, in which the principles of the disclosure may be utilized, and the accompanying drawings of which:
The figures herein are for illustrative purposes only and are not necessarily drawn to scale.
Before the present disclosure is described in greater detail, it is to be understood that this disclosure is not limited to particular embodiments described, and as such may, of course, vary. It is also to be understood that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only, and is not intended to be limiting.
Unless specifically stated, terms and phrases used in this document, and variations thereof, unless otherwise expressly stated, should be construed as open ended as opposed to limiting. Likewise, a group of items linked with the conjunction “and” should not be read as requiring that each and every one of those items be present in the grouping, but rather should be read as “and/or” unless expressly stated otherwise. Similarly, a group of items linked with the conjunction “or” should not be read as requiring mutual exclusivity among that group, but rather should also be read as “and/or” unless expressly stated otherwise.
Furthermore, although items, elements or components of the disclosure may be described or claimed in the singular, the plural is contemplated to be within the scope thereof unless limitation to the singular is explicitly stated. The presence of broadening words and phrases such as “one or more,” “at least,” “but not limited to” or other like phrases in some instances shall not be read to mean that the narrower case is intended or required in instances where such broadening phrases may be absent.
Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this disclosure belongs. Although any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can also be used in the practice or testing of the present disclosure, the preferred methods and materials are now described.
All publications and patents cited in this specification are cited to disclose and describe the methods and/or materials in connection with which the publications are cited. All such publications and patents are herein incorporated by references as if each individual publication or patent were specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference. Such incorporation by reference is expressly limited to the methods and/or materials described in the cited publications and patents and does not extend to any lexicographical definitions from the cited publications and patents. Any lexicographical definition in the publications and patents cited that is not also expressly repeated in the instant application should not be treated as such and should not be read as defining any terms appearing in the accompanying claims. The citation of any publication is for its disclosure prior to the filing date and should not be construed as an admission that the present disclosure is not entitled to antedate such publication by virtue of prior disclosure. Further, the dates of publication provided could be different from the actual publication dates that may need to be independently confirmed.
As will be apparent to those of skill in the art upon reading this disclosure, each of the individual embodiments described and illustrated herein has discrete components and features which may be readily separated from or combined with the features of any of the other several embodiments without departing from the scope or spirit of the present disclosure. Any recited method can be carried out in the order of events recited or in any other order that is logically possible.
Where a range is expressed, a further embodiment includes from the one particular value and/or to the other particular value. The recitation of numerical ranges by endpoints includes all numbers and fractions subsumed within the respective ranges, as well as the recited endpoints. Where a range of values is provided, it is understood that each intervening value, to the tenth of the unit of the lower limit unless the context clearly dictates otherwise, between the upper and lower limit of that range and any other stated or intervening value in that stated range, is encompassed within the disclosure. The upper and lower limits of these smaller ranges may independently be included in the smaller ranges and are also encompassed within the disclosure, subject to any specifically excluded limit in the stated range. Where the stated range includes one or both of the limits, ranges excluding either or both of those included limits are also included in the disclosure. For example, where the stated range includes one or both of the limits, ranges excluding either or both of those included limits are also included in the disclosure, e.g. the phrase “x to y” includes the range from ‘x’ to ‘y’ as well as the range greater than ‘x’ and less than ‘y’. The range can also be expressed as an upper limit, e.g. ‘about x, y, z, or less’ and should be interpreted to include the specific ranges of ‘about x’, ‘about y’, and ‘about z’ as well as the ranges of ‘less than x’, less than y’, and ‘less than z’. Likewise, the phrase ‘about x, y, z, or greater’ should be interpreted to include the specific ranges of ‘about x’, ‘about y’, and ‘about z’ as well as the ranges of ‘greater than x’, greater than y’, and ‘greater than z’. In addition, the phrase “about ‘x’ to ‘y’”, where ‘x’ and ‘y’ are numerical values, includes “about ‘x’ to about ‘y’”.
It should be noted that ratios, concentrations, amounts, and other numerical data can be expressed herein in a range format. It will be further understood that the endpoints of each of the ranges are significant both in relation to the other endpoint, and independently of the other endpoint. It is also understood that there are a number of values disclosed herein, and that each value is also herein disclosed as “about” that particular value in addition to the value itself. For example, if the value “10” is disclosed, then “about 10” is also disclosed. Ranges can be expressed herein as from “about” one particular value, and/or to “about” another particular value. Similarly, when values are expressed as approximations, by use of the antecedent “about,” it will be understood that the particular value forms a further aspect. For example, if the value “about 10” is disclosed, then “10” is also disclosed.
It is to be understood that such a range format is used for convenience and brevity, and thus, should be interpreted in a flexible manner to include not only the numerical values explicitly recited as the limits of the range, but also to include all the individual numerical values or sub-ranges encompassed within that range as if each numerical value and sub-range is explicitly recited. To illustrate, a numerical range of “about 0.1% to 5%” should be interpreted to include not only the explicitly recited values of about 0.1% to about 5%, but also include individual values (e.g., about 1%, about 2%, about 3%, and about 4%) and the sub-ranges (e.g., about 0.5% to about 1.1%; about 5% to about 2.4%; about 0.5% to about 3.2%, and about 0.5% to about 4.4%, and other possible sub-ranges) within the indicated range.
As used herein, the singular forms “a”, “an”, and “the” include both singular and plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.
As used herein, “about,” “approximately,” “substantially,” and the like, when used in connection with a measurable variable such as a parameter, an amount, a temporal duration, and the like, are meant to encompass variations of and from the specified value including those within experimental error (which can be determined by e.g. given data set, art accepted standard, and/or with e.g. a given confidence interval (e.g. 90%, 95%, or more confidence interval from the mean), such as variations of +/−10% or less, +/−5% or less, +/−1% or less, and +/−0.1% or less of and from the specified value, insofar such variations are appropriate to perform in the disclosure. As used herein, the terms “about,” “approximate,” “at or about,” and “substantially” can mean that the amount or value in question can be the exact value or a value that provides equivalent results or effects as recited in the claims or taught herein. That is, it is understood that amounts, sizes, formulations, parameters, and other quantities and characteristics are not and need not be exact, but may be approximate and/or larger or smaller, as desired, reflecting tolerances, conversion factors, rounding off, measurement error and the like, and other factors known to those of skill in the art such that equivalent results or effects are obtained. In some circumstances, the value that provides equivalent results or effects cannot be reasonably determined. In general, an amount, size, formulation, parameter or other quantity or characteristic is “about,” “approximate,” or “at or about” whether or not expressly stated to be such. It is understood that where “about,” “approximate,” or “at or about” is used before a quantitative value, the parameter also includes the specific quantitative value itself, unless specifically stated otherwise.
The term “optional” or “optionally” means that the subsequent described event, circumstance or substituent may or may not occur, and that the description includes instances where the event or circumstance occurs and instances where it does not.
Various embodiments are described hereinafter. It should be noted that the specific embodiments are not intended as an exhaustive description or as a limitation to the broader aspects discussed herein. One aspect described in conjunction with a particular embodiment is not necessarily limited to that embodiment and can be practiced with any other embodiment(s). Reference throughout this specification to “one embodiment”, “an embodiment,” “an example embodiment,” means that a particular feature, structure or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present disclosure. Thus, appearances of the phrases “in one embodiment,” “in an embodiment,” or “an example embodiment” in various places throughout this specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment, but may. Furthermore, the particular features, structures or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner, as would be apparent to a person skilled in the art from this disclosure, in one or more embodiments. Furthermore, while some embodiments described herein include some but not other features included in other embodiments, combinations of features of different embodiments are meant to be within the scope of the disclosure. For example, in the appended claims, any of the claimed embodiments can be used in any combination.
All patents, patent applications, published applications, and publications, databases, websites and other published materials cited herein are hereby incorporated by reference to the same extent as though each individual publication, published patent document, or patent application was specifically and individually indicated as being incorporated by reference.
Early identification of hearing impairment and ear disorders is important, which is why hearing screening is routinely done on newborns, with regular screening recommended on children through the age of 18. Screening is also completed with adults to assess and treat hearing problems. Procedural training is needed for new Speech-Language Pathologists and nursing students as well as continuing education for those trained to perform this procedure. An audiology simulator was developed to provide an alternative to traditional face-to-face lab instruction. Using a design science approach, the development of the simulation prototype is discussed. Contributions include a useful framework for developing such a simulation of an existing process, a description of a unique artifact that supports an individualized, self-paced learning environment using context-sensitive feedback and performance assessment, and an extensible approach to supporting virtual subjects in audiological training.
The current disclosure provides a Software Simulation of a Hearing Screening educational trainer, requiring the “technician” learner to assess a series of Otoscope images, Tympanometry traces, and subject Audiometer responses, each associated with a virtual subject. The technician performs the tests and adds their assessment, diagnosis, and notes related to each test. Once completed, the system checks the technician's assessments against the correct answers for that subject and provides feedback to the technician learner. The current disclosure provides the ability to do randomized tests, and has the ability to replicate tests for inter-reliability testing. This application is primarily targeted to students in the field of communication disorders (speech-language pathologists and audiologists), but could be used in training nurses, teachers, and others involved in conducting hearing screenings.
The current disclosure automatically assesses learners and automatically provides feedback. Learners do not need supervision, which is significant due to the shortage of faculty, and the application can run on any windows computer, including a computer lab, making the training more accessible to trainees.
In one embodiment, a trainee could log onto the hearing screening simulator system. The trainee would then be presented with instructions 200, see
The testing can also involve a Tympanogram step, where a test is ran and measures the function and movement of the eardrum and middle ear. The results of tympanometry could be represented via a visual illustration 208, see
The system could also provide audiometer testing. This would test the ability of the hypothetical test subject to “hear” different frequencies. User interface 100 could allow increasing and decreasing the level of decibels presented to the test subject via interaction with analog representation 116 and/or frequency adjustment 124, such as by clicking on same, sliding a mouse over same, selecting a particular decibel level by clicking on same, etc. In one aspect, the testing subject representation 128 may be a stylized upper torso 300 shown on the system display, see
When the sound is “heard” by the test subject, the trainee can then mark 502 this result on the system via interaction with audiometry simulation results 500, see
The current disclosure provides an audiology simulator developed to provide an alternative to a traditional face-to-face lab instruction training for Language Speech Pathologists learning how to perform hearing screening assessments. This tool would also be useful for nurses, teachers and audiologists to train on performing this procedure.
The Hearing Screening test is a fast, inexpensive, and easy to perform pass/refer screening procedure used to identify those who require further audiological evaluation. Those who do not pass a hearing screening (the term fail is not used) is typically referred to a licensed audiologist who would perform more detailed hearing testing.
A hearing screening test can involve three procedures—pure-tone hearing screening which identifies hearing impairment, otoscopy which is a visual inspection of the outer ear, and tympanometry which measures the movement of the eardrum in response to a change in pressure. Different protocols are used depending on patient's age. See, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, “Guidelines for audiologic screening”, 1997. For school-age children, hearing screening helps identify those most likely to have a hearing impairment that may interfere with their education, health, development, or communication. Hearing impairment is defined as the inability to hear a pure tone at the 20 dB HL level. See, Id. Hearing screening is also completed with adults. Hearing impairment (i.e., loss or abnormality of psychological or physiological function) and/or hearing disability (i.e., restriction or lack of ability to perform an activity, resulting from an impairment) are prevalent chronic conditions among adults of all ages with hearing impairment increasing as a function of age.
Guidelines also exist for screening for outer and middle ear disorders. It is a pass/refer procedure that involves a visual inspection via an otoscope or video otoscope, and acoustic immittance testing via a tympanogram. An otoscopy exam is a clinical procedure used to examine structures of the outer ear, particularly the external auditory canal and tympanic membrane (eardrum). A tympanometry test measures how the eardrum moves and helps diagnose disorders that can lead to hearing loss.
Medical institutions are grappling with how decrease training costs with an increased focus on digital education, including online and distance learning programs, and simulations. Simulation is increasingly being used in medical training. It has been found to improve nursing knowledge and skills, self-confidence, communication skills, empathy, critical thinking abilities, leadership, and situation management among nursing students. See, R. P. Cant, and S. J. Cooper, “Simulation-based learning in nurse education: systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 66, pp. 3-15, 2010, v. Guise, M. Chambers, and M. Välimäki, “What can virtual patient simulation offer mental health nursing education?”, Journal of psychiatric and mental health nursing, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 410-418, 2012, C. La Cerra, A. Dante, V. Caponnetto, I. Franconi, E. Gaxhja, C. Petrucci, et al., “Effects of high-fidelity simulation based on life-threatening clinical condition scenarios on learning outcomes of undergraduate and postgraduate nursing students: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, BMJ Open, vol. 9, No. 2, e025306, 2019, and D. K. Brown, “Simulation before clinical practice: the educational advantages”, Audiology Today, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 16-24, 2017, D. Bakhos, J. Galvin, J. M. Aoustin, M. Robier, S. Kerneis, G. Bechet, . . . & Aussedat, C. (2020). “Training outcomes for audiology students using virtual reality or traditional training methods”, PloS one, vol. 15, no. 12, 2020.
Clinical training requires students to gain experience with subjects exhibiting different medical conditions, which is challenging in a training lab. While peers often serve as test subjects for other students, this does not guarantee exposure to, and experience with, the full spectrum of medical conditions.
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association recognizes the use of standardized patients and simulation technologies as alternatives to clinical education methods. See, ASHA, “2014 standards for the certificate of clinical competence in speech-language pathology”, Council for Clinical Certification in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association., 2016, retrieved [6/1/2021] from asha.org/Certification/2014-Speech-Language-Pathology-Certification-Standards. Traditionally, standardized patients (SP) were individuals trained to portray a specific clinical case in a highly consistent and measurable manner. See, R. I. Zraick, “Review of the use of standardized patients in speech-language pathology clinical education”, International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 112-118, 2012. With the introduction of configurable manikins, different SP profiles may be loaded into a test manikin to present students with different scenarios. The National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) also supports the use of quality simulations as a substitute for a percentage of clinical hours in undergraduate nursing programs. See, C. Nye, S. H. Campbell, S. H. Hebert, C. Short, and M. Thomas“, Simulation in advanced practice nursing programs: A North-American survey”, Clinical Simulation in Nursing, vol. 26, no. 3-10, 2019. Generally, little is known about the effectiveness of simulation in audiology education and training. See, W. A. Kaf, C. G. Masterson, N. Dion, S. L. Berg, and M. K. Abdelhakiem, M. K., “Optimizing otoscopy competency in audiology students through supplementary otoscopy training”, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 859-866, 2013, A. A. Alanazi, “The use of simulation in audiology education to improve students' professional competency”, ProQuest LLC, 2017, and A. Reed, A. Andre, S. Ananthakrishnan, and P. Korczak, “Effectiveness of simulation training on graduate audiology students' auditory brainstem response testing skills”, American Journal of Audiology, pp. 1-10, 2021.
Health care professionals need training in many areas, including communication with patients, diagnostic procedures, and how to work with appropriate diagnostic equipment. This is true for audiology education. Healthcare professionals need to be familiar with how to operate specialized diagnostic equipment and interpretation of results. However, gaining access to the diagnostic equipment can be difficult. There is a significant expense to equip and staff an instructional lab, which limits the hours the lab is accessible and the number of students that can receive training at any given time.
Hearing Screening tests are administered by those trained to do these tests, including speech audiologists, speech language pathologists, nurses, and teachers. See, ASHA, “Tests of the middle ear”, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 2021, retrieved 6/4/2021 from asha.org/public/hearing/tests-of-the-middle-ear/. A hearing screening is a quick, inexpensive, easily administered test that results in either a pass/refer result. Passing indicates the patient shows no signs of hearing loss. Not passing means the patient should be referred for a more thorough hearing assessment by a licensed audiologist.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendations for preventative pediatric health care advocates regular hearing screening for all children from age 4 to 21 years of age, regardless of the presence or absence of risk factors for hearing loss. See, AAP, “Recommendations for preventive pediatric health care. Pediatrics”, Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine. American Academy of Pediatrics, vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 645-646, 2000, retrieved on Jun. 4, 2021 from pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/105/3/645 and AAP, “2017 recommendations for preventive pediatric health care”, American Academy of Pediatrics, 2017, retrieved on Jun. 4, 2021 from pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/139/4/e20170254.full.pdf?embargo=true&download=true. This suggests that the 155,000 new nursing graduates each year need training in how to administer audiometric screening tests. In addition, there are over 4 million nurses in the U.S. and 20 million worldwide that would benefit from continuing education training in this area. California, for example, requires registered nurses to complete 30 hours of continuing education contact hours every 2 years to maintain their active license. See, CBRN, “Continuing education for license renewal, California Board of Registered Nursing, 2021, retrieved on Jun. 4, 2021 from rn.ca.gov/licensees/ce-renewal.shtml.
Getting the necessary audiology training can be challenging due to capacity limitations of the training lab, or the lack of a convenient facility for remote learners. To address these issues, the current disclosure devised a hearing screening simulator to help offset the training deficit. While simulation is an effective pedagogy for educating health professionals and is used extensively in undergraduate nursing education, it is not in widespread use in the field of audiology training. The inventors sought to design and develop a tool that could provide nursing students practice in performing hearing screening tests online, without the requirement to visit an “on-campus” hearing lab and interacting with live patients. This was particularly important during the COVID-19 pandemic where disease exposure risk was a critical issue. The capacity of the lab was limited in terms of both space and availability of certified trainers making scheduling difficult. Traveling to the physical training lab was also inconvenient for many of the remote students, who live all over North America.
A design science approach was adopted for this project. Initial design specifications were collected for the Hearing Screening Simulator. An iterative process involving the development of a prototype, review, and critique by the lab staff were employed which fed into the next development iteration. After several iterations, the final prototype was tested to assess if students felt the simulator was useful in learning how to administer hearing screening tests and determine students' confidence in their skills after using the simulator.
A national study found that 14.9% of children (6-19 years of age) have low- or high-frequency hearing loss in one or both ears. See, A. S. Niskar, S. M. Kieszak, A. Holmes, E. Esteban, C. Rubin, and D. J. Brody, “Prevalence of hearing loss among children 6 to 19 years of age: the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Jama, vol. 279, no. 14, pp. 1071-1075, 1988. Early identification, diagnosis, and intervention are beneficial, improving the likelihood that children develop effective communication and language skills, and achieve successful learning outcomes. See, M. J. Guralnick, M. J., “Why early intervention works: A systems perspective”, Infants & Young Children, vol. 24, pp. 6-28, 2011. As such, the test must be carried out effectively. This is in part accomplished through adequate training of healthcare students and personnel on how to perform tests and diagnose patients. See, A. A. Alanazi, supra.
A. Hearing Screening Test Procedure
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's (ASHA) Guidelines for Audiologic Screening, see, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, supra., specifies different procedures for doing screening for hearing impairment based on the age of the subject. There are guidelines for screening: newborns and infants age birth through 6 months; infants and toddlers age 7 months through 2 years; preschool children age 3 to 5 years, school-age children age 5 through 18 years; and adults 18 years or older. Of interest to the current disclosure are the guidelines for school-age children ages 3 to 5 ages, children ages 5 to 18 years, and adults 18 years and above. The younger subjects require additional training and different procedures. In part, the guidelines for subjects in the 5-to-18 year age group, specify testing should be done using 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz tones at 20 dB HL, and that the test is repeated at least twice at each frequency to assure reliability. For adults, the testing should also be done using 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz tones, but with a 25 dB HL setting.
ASHA's Guidelines for Audiologic Screening, see Id., also provides guidelines for screening the outer and middle ears. This procedure, which is the same for all age groups, includes an optional case history, visual examination (otoscope examination), and acoustic immittance testing (tympanogram).
Studies have shown simulation to be effective in audiology education and training. See, A. A. Alanazi, M. S. Mohamud, S. S. AlSuwailem, “The effect of simulation learning on audiology and speech-language pathology students' self-confidence related to early hearing detection and intervention: a randomized experiment”, Speech, Language and Hearing, pp. 1-14, 2020, R. Ozelie, P. Panfil, N. Swiderski, and E. Walz, “Hearing voices simulation: impact on occupational therapy students”, The Open Journal of Occupational Therapy, vol. 6 no. 4, 10, 2018, and E. Toader, “Clinical simulations for learning medical skills: a work-based approach to simulators”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 197, pp. 2443-2448, 2015.
Simulation can help transfer theory to practice in an integrated teaching and learning model. See, B. M. Halm, M. T. Lee, A. A. Franke, “Improving toxicology knowledge in preclinical medical students using high-fidelity patient simulators”. Hawaii Medical Journal, vol. 70, no. 6, pp. 112-115, 2011. Simulators can present a full range of patient cases that represent real-world clinical diagnoses. These simulated cases present patients with symptoms that must be detected and diagnosed by the student. However, the use of simulation in audiology education is still in its infancy. See, ProQuest LLC, 2017, supra.
The inventors are not aware of any existing simulation tools that model the operation of commercial audiometry devices, or that provide the means for students to train on the use of such devices. CARL, sold by AHead Simulations, is a physiologically and acoustically realistic desktop manikin that enables clinicians and students to easily and safely train and develop their skills. “CARL is so realistic that you can see inside his ear, make measurements, fit hearing aids and tubes, and generate accurate readings that indicate how well the hearing aid is fitted.” Some of the applications that have used CARL include an introduction to audiometry and occupational hearing, serving as a standardized patient for audiometry and the fitting of hearing aid training, evaluating hearing aid streaming of music and speech, and the programming and verifying telecoil programs. However, CARL is suitable only for in-person training using commercial clinical test equipment since CARL simulates standardized patients, not clinical instruments. While CARL is a useful educational tool for audiologists who will go on to provide diagnostic evaluations and hearing aid programming, the technology is too complex and not suited for training providers who will go on to complete hearing screenings.
Prior work in audiology simulation education includes the use of an immersive training system that was found to provide audiology students with better learning outcomes and self-confidence than found with traditional training. See, D. Bakhos, et al. supra. Simulated training has been found to help with student's self-confidence in performing audiology testing. See, Id., and Speech, Language and Hearing, pp. 1-14, 2020, supra. The use of standardized patients for training on infant hearing screening and parental counseling simulation was found to improve clinical skills and increase confidence levels of audiology students. See, Id. In one study, significant improvements in clinical skill levels and higher confidence were observed when students completed the simulation task of preparing an adult mannequin for an auditory brainstem response (ABR) test. See, A. Reed, et al., supra. In another study, the incorporation of simulation workshops in Speech and Language Therapy curricula was found to have a positive quantitative and qualitative impact on students' perception of learning. See, M. M. Munoz-Montes, I. Villagrán-Gutiérrez, F. Pozo-Tapia, P. Tapia-Tapia, Y. Castro-Soares, and E. Fuentes-Lopez, “Speech and language therapy students' perception of learning through the incorporation of clinical simulation workshops: a mixed-methods study”, Revista CEFAC, vol. 23, 2021. The critical review and debriefing of students by qualified practitioners following simulated training is an important aspect of an experiential learning experience. See, R. M. Fanning, and D. M. Gaba, “The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning”, Simulation in Healthcare, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 115-125, 2007.
The current disclosure follows a design science research (DSR) methodology consisting of (i) problem identification and motivation, (ii) definition of the objectives for a solution, (iii) design and development, (iv) demonstration, (v) evaluation, and (vi) communication. See, S. Gregor and A. R. Hevner, “Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact,” MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, vol. 37, no. 2. University of Minnesota, pp. 337-355, 2013, doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.2.01 and K. Peffers, T. Tuunanen, M. A. Rothenberger, and S. Chatterjee, “A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research,” J. Manag. Inf. Syst., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 45-77, 2007, doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302. The current disclosure identified and translated design requirements for an audiology simulator into design components. The inventors then classified these functional components in the app into design principles and features for designing a healthcare simulation app for clinical education and training. The inventors conformed their meta-artifacts to mode 3C and 4B of design theorizing, i.e. seek to contribute to knowledge for solution design process and system to inform the design of the DSR project system and codify effective design principles and features, see, A. Drechsler, “Utilizing, Producing, and Contributing Design Knowledge in DSR Projects,” Open Access Victoria University of Wellington|Te Herenga Waka, January 2011. doi: 10.26686/WGTN.13088369.V1, that contribute to future DSR projects of similar context. The design requirements, artifact design and development, and evaluation are described below.
Hearing clinic personnel sought a tool to train students in an online Master's of Speech Language Pathology program on how acceleratorcentre.com/news/although-he-may-look-like-one-carl-is-no-dummy to administer hearing screening assessments. This involves performing three separate tests—otoscopy which takes a picture of the outer ear, tympanometry which measures the movement of the eardrum in response to a pressure change, and a pure-tone audiometer which measures hearing impairment. The clinic indicated that no such simulator existed, and the development would be useful, making it easier for students and practitioners to more easily train in performing these assessments. The goal of the current disclosure was to develop an effective simulator that could replicate as close as possible the experience of administering and interpreting a hearing screening test. To guide this disclosure, a conceptual model of the application was first developed.
Before an effective solution could be developed, it is necessary to understand the problem. Since the goal was to simulate an existing process, it was necessary to understand all the elements that play a role in that process and understand how they interact. To simulate a hearing screening test there are two actors, namely the technician administering the test, and the subject being tested. Also critical is the testing environment which includes the clinical equipment needed to perform the test. A less obvious element relates to systems that might address administrative requirements. These might be administrative or reporting functions that are done in the background. Developing an understanding of how actors interact is also critical. An effective approach is to develop separate Use Cases to detail how actors interact and what information is being transferred.
For the current project, there are five Use Cases, namely: authenticating and authorizing the technician, collecting patient history, following the proper protocol and performing the hearing screening, recording of technician notes during the examination, and assessing the accuracy of technician's examination process and subsequent results.
Design requirements were gathered in four iterations with a clinical assistant professor at the University of South Carolina Montgomery Speech-Language-Hearing clinic in the Arnold School of Public Health. A series of informal interviews were conducted to gather and clarify requirements at the outset of the project as well as during software development. An agile development model was used. Once an operational prototype was developed, the clinical instructor would evaluate it and provide feedback, which initiated the next round in the development. System specifications expanded as the project progressed. The initial object was to have a simulator that would give students exposure to the audiometer but automatically assess student performance. As the capabilities of the simulator increased, so too did the objectives of the project.
Meta-requirements fall into two categories—clinical requirements necessary for performing a hearing screening evaluation, and those included for operational reasons. The clinical requirements reflect the data that would be collected and presented using a traditional training session with commercial equipment. The operational requirements reflect additional features that exceed the clinical requirements and enable a web-based digital learning experience, such as calculate a student grade and therefore represent value-added aspects of the simulator. The Meta requirements included:
1) Clinical Requirements
2) Operational Requirements
Traditionally, software was developed for specific platforms, such as WINDOWS, LINUX, or MAC OS. Today, developers build Web-based applications that run on the Web, that are completely independent of the user's actual computer operating system. Web-based applications are a particular type of software that allows users to interact with a remote server through a web browser interface. They have seen a huge increase in popularity in recent years, replacing desktop applications and becoming a crucial instrument for small and large businesses around the world.
Web-based applications have a number of advantages over traditional desktop apps, most prominently their portability. With web-based apps, users don't have to install additional software, and developers do not have to write multiple versions of the same application for different operating systems. Various functions of the current disclosure are well suited to web-based applications. This include tracking performance records of students/trainees, managing lesson plans, monitoring progress on the HSS, and/or, not limited to, controlling work flow of students to alter the teaching pace, such as increasing or decreasing same, to cater to a particular student's training speed/learning rate. All of this can be achieved by writing a single web-based application that will be run on a server. The app can be written in various programming languages and make use of multiple technologies and frameworks. A web-based application will run on the user's computer's browser no matter what operating system is installed. This makes web-based apps one of the most universal cross-platform solutions available today.
Web-based software does not have to be installed and configured, so it is much easier to quickly increase the number of active users as opposed to desktop programs. Further, modern Web servers perform extremely well even when faced with thousands of simultaneous requests, so expanding the network of Web app users is often possible without any additional software configuration or modification, such as adding additional classes, remote learning facilities, etc.
A web-based application is any program that is accessed over a network connection using HTTP, rather than existing within a device's memory. Web-based applications often run inside a web browser. However, web-based applications also may be client-based, where a small part of the program is downloaded to a user's desktop, but processing is done over the internet on an external server.
A simulation objective was to get students familiar with the audiology equipment and comfortable administering hearing screening tests. Having a similar look and feel to commercial equipment was a high priority. To complete a hearing screening test, students need to be familiar with all three required testing modes (i.e., otoscope, tympanometer, and audiometer), so inclusion was important. Since the focus was on screening, and not a full hearing assessment, the system only had to simulate a limited set of test points. Being able to interpret test data and reach a correct result was also a key goal, and so it was important to present the results in an industry-standard format. The initial requirements did not include standard test subjects. This requirement was added in an early prototype review. The inventors started with a single subject, which was eventually expanded to ten.
Of the operational requirements, porting the simulation was a high priority. The disclosure may function through Windows® applications and is stable and performing as expected. With this goal of moving the simulator to the web, the inclusion of extra Metadata that reports time spent and the number of tests completed will help give training supervisors confidence that the student has completed the training. Being able to print out the session record lets the students document their performance. Automatic grading provides the learner immediate feedback and reinforces the learning process. Having a full-featured simulator allows the curious learner to explore on their own, and also allows the simulator to be used for training other than for just hearing screening (i.e., completing more comprehensive audiology testing). Also having the ability to assess results across multiple student technicians may help identify weaknesses and strengths in the classroom training.
The Hearing Screening Simulator (HSS) was developed as a Windows form application using Visual Basic as the development language. Visual Basic was used because it supported a graphical user interface, integrated charting libraries needed for the audiology graphs, and the ease with which it could be ported to a web-based platform. The design of the simulator unit was based on the look of existing audiology testing units in the lab. This was done to acquaint students with the layout and operation of these devices and to provide a more realistic simulation experience.
The HSS is designed to simulate three clinical tests used in hearing screening and audiological evaluations. An otoscope exam helps to assess the condition of the external auditory canal and tympanic membrane. This is a visual process. A doctor may use a traditional otoscope to look into the patient's ears, or, as in our simulation, use a camera to capture an image. Tympanometry tests how well the subject's eardrum moves, as well as determine the volume of the ear canal and pressure of the middle ear space. The audiologist will put a small probe, which looks like an earphone, into each ear. A small device attached to the probe will push air into the subject's ear, and the device measures the resulting response. This creates a graph, which is displayed on the test unit. See, ASHA “Tests of the middle ear,” supra. The audiometer is used to determine the quietest sound the subject can hear at different pitches or frequencies. A tone is presented and the subject indicates if they heard it by raising their hand. In a screening, however, tones are presented at a fixed level considered “normal hearing” (20 dBHL), rather than determining the softest level the subject can hear.
All student interaction with the simulator is stored in a SQL database. This also handles user authentication and authorization. The simulator user interface consisting of three panels is shown in
The user interface is designed with interactive objects, see
The simulator's three testing modes are ‘Oto’ to display an otoscope image, ‘Tym’ to display the tympanogram of the target ear, or ‘Aud’ to perform an audiological test. The bank of buttons on the right control the test conditions for the audiometer. This includes frequency in Hz, intensity level in dBHL, sample type (being either pure tone, pulsed, or frequency modulated), and controls to specify which ear is to be tested (right, left, or both (stereo). The large dial on the bottom left provides an alternate way of controlling the intensity level presented to the subject. The intensity level is graphically displayed in the progress bar above the dial.
Modeled on the design and operation of commercial devices, the curved button is referred to as the ‘Present’ button, which serves one of two functions based on the testing mode. On commercial devices a tympanogram test begins automatically when a seal is obtained on the ear canal. Since the simulator did not model acquiring this seal, there needed to be a way to initiate the test. The present button was used to trigger the test and displays the resulting tympanogram chart. There is no operator or subject response needed for this test—the test is fast and automatic. The HSS displaying a stored image file representing the subject's tympanogram chart after the student presses the present button. it is meant to simulate a tympanogram test. When the user presses the curved Present button in the ‘Aud’ (audiometer mode) the test tone is presented to the subject. To provide visual confirmation that the tone was played, an indicator light is displayed next to the avatar. Note, this is meant as an indicator to the technician, and no such indicator would be visible to the subject in real audiological tests.
The subject avatar raises its hand if the simulation ‘hears’ the presented tone, see
In the audiogram mode, when a tone is presented to the subject, a representative tone is also played for the technician (i.e., the student) and an indicator light illuminated, see
A sample otoscope image, tympanogram, and audiogram chart are shown in
The HSS simulator may be equipped with a number of patients, such as equipped with 10 (or more or fewer) standard patients, although the set of standard patients could also be expanded to enhance the catalog of clinical cases covered by the simulator. Each patient has a short backstory which is presented to the student when the subject is selected. This provides the age and gender of the subject, and a brief background comment related to any hearing concerns. The ten subjects were created with varying audiologic conditions and pathologies, with audiometry, tympanometry, and otoscopy results consistent with their condition. One child and adult standard patient with normal results were included as well. To help mask the identity of these standard patients and give the illusion of having a larger subject base, the profile information is randomized each time the program is run. The genders are changed, age shifted slightly, the name of the subject being selected from a large list of diverse names, and the backstory adjusted to match the new subject profile. This not only prevents someone from circumventing the training by utilizing results from earlier tests, but it also enables repetitive testing on the same standardized subject without it being evident it is the same subject.
As the student goes through the simulation, they are asked to record their observations and patient results in the Technician Notes panel. There are note sections for each of the three tests (otoscope, tympanogram, and audiometer). The student is asked to provide a result for each ear and to add comments and observations related to that test. Having the student enter this information into the simulator allows the simulator to assess their performance. The system knows which result is correct based on the standard subject being tested. Taking into consideration the three individual tests, the student must also make a recommendation regarding the patient's subsequent follow-up, and also has the opportunity to add a related comment. This final recommendation can also be automatically graded by the simulator and provide appropriate feedback as needed. The patient cases, associated correct result, and correct recommendations were defined by the project clinical team and implemented in the application database.
Once the student completes the testing and enters their session notes, the data is saved to a database and a session report is generated, see
Thirty-three first year speech-language pathology graduate students enrolled in an introduction to audiology class participated to help refine this disclosure. All participants received the same standardized lecture covering concepts surrounding hearing loss and how to perform hearing screening assessments. Students were randomly assigned to the control (n=16, female=16) or test (n=17, female=17) groups. The control group received brief in-person training to explain how to operate the equipment, and then were evaluated conducting their live, in-person audiology test. The test group received the same in-person equipment introduction and used the simulation tool before being evaluated doing their live audiology test. Students in each group were divided into two-member teams, with one group of three in the test group. Each student team rotated between roles, acting as a test subject (i.e., patient) and acting as the test evaluator. Approximately half of the students in each group had previous hands-on experience with a hearing screening audiometer. Students were sorted into an approximately equal number of pairings of “no previous experience,” “one partner with previous experience”, and “both partners with previous experience”.
Participants in the test group received supplementary training with the simulation tool. They were introduced to the simulator and were allowed to work with it for about 15 minutes, working through approximately five cases with their partner. A 25 item questionnaire was administered to students to assess their confidence in their skills both prior to and after performing the live hearing screening test. The questionnaire was created by the audiology staff to gauge students' knowledge and confidence in administering and interpreting hearing screening tests. A five-point Likert scale was used. Response options and subsequent coding values were Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Neither Disagree or Agree (3), Agree (4), and Strongly Agree (5). A set of seven to nine questions were asked related to each of the assessment modes (otoscope, tympanogram, and audiometer). The test group was also asked four additional free response questions in the same questionnaire to assess perceptions about the simulation tool. A total of 16 surveys were completed by each group. One survey was not usable and was thus removed from the analysis.
A live assessment of student clinical technique was completed using commercial audiometry units using peers as test subjects. Supervising certified instructors observed the tests and graded the student's performance and technique.
It was expected that using the simulation training tool together with in-person training would be perceived by students to be at least as effective, and possibly an improvement, over in-person only training using commercial audiology equipment. Though some indication of improvement was expected, statistically significant differences between groups were not expected for most questionnaire items between the test and control groups. All statistical analyses were conducted using a standard, commercially available statistical software tool (NCSS 2019 Statistical Software). Thematic analysis of qualitative responses was conducted to produce categorical findings and related discussion.
Supervising certified instructors observed the student testing and graded the student's performance and technique. All students in both the control and test group performed the three tests satisfactorily (i.e., otoscopy, tympanogram, hearing screening). Some students, primarily in the control group, did not follow the prescribed protocol exactly, as reflected in the technique scores shown in Table 1, see
The test group resulted in a higher post-test mean score and a higher percent change than the control group for all three test component groupings: Otoscope, Tympanogram, and Hearing Screening (see Table 2,
As shown in Table 3, see
The test group was asked four free response questions regarding their impression of the simulator tool. The first asked “what aspects of the simulation did you like?” The responses were grouped into common themes, namely:
The responses indicate that the students found the hands-on experience provided by the simulator provided an easy to use and useful learning experience with the audiometer that increased the students' confidence in their ability to perform hearing screening testing.
The second free response question asked “what aspects of the simulator did you not like?” This also elicited five thematic responses, namely:
The simulator was designed to display an image or chart for a virtual subject and not how to perform an otoscopic or tympanometry exam. Students wanted more explanation as to how to perform these exams. Others felt the instructions, in general, could be improved, possibly incorporating pictures or a video. One comment expressed a concern that the design of the simulator did not look like the audiogram machine. Given the simulator was modeled to look similar to the GSI 39 Combination Audiometer and Tympanometry device, it is assumed the student was familiar with a different model.
The third question asked “do you have any recommendations to improve the simulator?” Response themes were:
The most frequent response was that the simulator should improve training on how to perform otoscopy and tympanometry testing. It was also suggested that the simulator model the instructions provided by the testing technician to the subject. Future software iterations may consider these changes.
The fourth question asked the student “would you like to share anything else?” Responses included:
Responses to the final question noted positivity towards the simulation tool indicating its potential benefit for providing a range of realistic learning experiences. It does suggest however that some feature of the simulator need to be discussed further in the system documentation. The final three comments reinforced that the simulator was easy to use, and perceived as a useful addition to the class.
The HSS disclosed herein is a novel solution that may be useful in training future Speech-Language Pathologists, student nurses, and other professionals in the performance of hearing screening testing. This is the only known solution that permits learners to perform a hearing screening assessment on simulated patients, and receive constructive feedback on their performance. It addresses a need for remote training that cannot be provided using commercial audiology equipment, and thus represents an improvement, see, S Gregor et al, supra, on the state-of-the-art. It provides a heretofore unavailable avenue for experiential learning for online and remote learners. The design science research framework provided in this study may be useful for developing simulation training, generally, and audiology simulation training specifically. The software simulation tool provides a design artifact that was tested and evaluated across 32 participants and thus provides a complete DSR cycle inclusive of artifact evaluation.
This disclosure provides a comprehensive technical investigation and evaluation of the requirements for the simulator focused on the user interface design, and user experience influencing the system design artifact instantiation of an HSS. In the evaluation, we surveyed users to assess usability, and efficacy as a teaching tool. While the mean scores for the test group were largely higher than the control group and demonstrated larger percent change from pre-test to post-test, there were few statistically significant differences between groups. This was not surprising considering the very early phase of research in this disclosure and the known difficulties measuring educational interventions especially with small sample sizes. Taken together, the quantitative and qualitative results from this disclosure show significant promise for audiology simulator tools for enhancing audiology education. The results of this disclosure indicate the working prototype of the simulator may provide a strong supplement to in-person training using commercially available equipment. Participants noted the simulator was intuitive and useful for learning the skills needed to perform hearing screening tests while also indicating areas for improvement.
While the number of participants is low (n=33), yet this is appropriate for an initial pilot test. Future studies should include a broader range of participants. This disclosure represents the first test of the simulation software. Future iterations of the software with prescribed changes may demonstrate different results. A common issue for the control group was failure to communicate instructions to the subjects as prescribed in the protocol. This was not as prevalent in the test group which may indicate the added simulator practice impacted the student's performance even though it did not explicitly indicate or model this behavior.
Various modifications and variations of the described methods, systems, and devices of the disclosure will be apparent to those skilled in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the disclosure. Although the disclosure has been described in connection with specific embodiments, it will be understood that it is capable of further modifications and that the disclosure as claimed should not be unduly limited to such specific embodiments. Indeed, various modifications of the described modes for carrying out the disclosure that are obvious to those skilled in the art are intended to be within the scope of the disclosure. This application is intended to cover any variations, uses, or adaptations of the disclosure following, in general, the principles of the disclosure and including such departures from the present disclosure come within known customary practice within the art to which the disclosure pertains and may be applied to the essential features herein before set forth.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 63174158 | Apr 2021 | US |
