Exaggerated hearing loss in noise induced hearing loss compensation claims in Victoria.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the incidence of exaggerated hearing loss in people claiming workers compensation for noise induced hearing loss, as well as the ability of a range of testers to detect this exaggeration.


METHODS
333 people who claimed compensation for noise induced hearing loss between 13 September 1993 and 31 July 1994 in Victoria and who had undergone two independent subjective hearing tests.


METHODS
The hearing test results and referral decisions made by testers were examined in the light of the results of a single objective hearing test (cortical evoked response audiometry).


RESULTS
The incidence of exaggerated hearing loss was 17.7%. Testers performing the first subjective hearing test detected only 2.2% of claimants who exaggerated. The audiologist performing the second subjective test detected 94.2% of claimants who exaggerated.


CONCLUSIONS
The high incidence of exaggerated hearing loss and the large difference in ability to detect this exaggeration by the two groups of testers demonstrate the need for appropriate test procedures to be followed and a second hearing test to be reintroduced. Without accurate testing, there will be overpayment for noise induced hearing loss claims.
Rickards
F W
FW
Department of Learning, Assessment and Special Education, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC.
De Vidi
S
S
D002983:Clinical Competence; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D006317:Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000191:economics / Q000453:epidemiology; D006320:Hearing Tests / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D015994:Incidence; D008306:Malingering; D014739:Victoria / Q000453:epidemiology; D014942:Workers' Compensation