Smartphone-Based Hearing Testing Versus Clinical Audiometry: A Comparative Study in Ear, Nose, and Throat Practice

<b>Introduction:</b> Hearing loss affects millions worldwide, yet access to timely audiometric testing remains limited. Mobile applications offer the potential for convenient, low-cost screening and monitoring outside the clinic. <br><br><b>Aim:</b> This study evaluates the Mimi Hearing Test app, focusing on its diagnostic accuracy, reliability, and overall user experience compared with the clinical standard. <br><br><b>Materials and methods:</b> Thirty adult patients from an otolaryngology clinic participated in this comparative study. Each underwent 2 assessments, a traditional pure-tone audiogram performed by an audiologist and a digital hearing test using the Mimi Hearing Test app. Participants then completed a questionnaire rating the app's usability, clarity of results, and suitability for at-home use. <br><br><b>Results:</b> The study found a strong concordance between the pure tone average values obtained from the Mimi Hearing Test app and those from clinical audiometry, especially in participants with normal or moderate hearing loss. Discrepancies were noted in cases of profound and asymmetric hearing loss, where the app sometimes underestimated hearing thresholds. Patient feedback was generally positive, with a significant interest in regular at-home monitoring. Neutral or negative impressions were more common among older participants, highlighting the need for age-sensitive design and user support with digital health tools. <br><br><b>Conclusions:</b> The Mimi Hearing Test app demonstrates strong potential as a screening and monitoring tool for individuals with mild-to-moderate hearing impairment. While it is not a substitute for formal clinical audiometry testing in complex cases, it serves as an effective complementary tool that can raise patient awareness, encourage self-monitoring, and support earlier interventions in hearing health.