We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Auditory brainstem response in children with risk factor for hearing loss: comparative analysis between the use of different acoustic stimuli in electrophysiological findings.
- Authors
Quintela, Lara; Gentil, Fernanda; Tavares, João Manuel R. S.
- Abstract
Background: The auditory brainstem response (ABR) is classically evoked with the click stimulus. New stimuli, such as chirp, have been proposed with the aim of improving the identification of different types and degrees of hearing loss. Material and methods: 30 children aged between 4 and 11 months participated in this study, with one or more risk factors for hearing loss. The study participants were submitted to the electrophysiological hearing assessment by ABR, with click and LS CE-chirp stimuli, at different intensities, with different waves identification (I, III and V) as a function of the intensity been evaluated. The data was acquired using a clinical equipment with the Eclipse software, module EP25, of Interacoustics, which was used for data analysis. The latency and amplitude values obtained in the evaluations of each stimulus were compared, and the respective electrophysiological hearing thresholds obtained analyzed. Results: It was verified that there was a difference in the results of the evaluations due to the use of click and LS CE-chirp stimuli, being statistically significant in the latency of wave I at intensities of 80 and 90 dB, in the latency of wave III at the intensity of 80 dB and wave V latency at intensities of 90, 80, 30 and 20 dB. As for the amplitudes, this difference proved to be statistically significant for wave V at the intensity of 80, 60, 30 and 20 dB. No statistically significant differences were found by comparing the electrophysiological hearing threshold between click and LS CE-chirp stimuli. Conclusions: The differences observed in amplitude facilitate the identification of waves using the LS CE-chirp stimulus. In latency, the found differences did not present constraints to the electrophysiological assessment, as they were superior, except at 60 dB, using the LS CE-chirp stimulus in the assessments, also allowing the identification of the electrophysiological hearing threshold efficiently. Electrophysiological hearing threshold evaluation is facilitated by the use of the LS CE-chirp stimuli, although there was no statistically significant difference at the level of the electrophysiological hearing threshold between stimuli.
- Subjects
PORTUGAL; BRAIN stem physiology; EAR physiology; AUDITORY evoked response; HEARING; AUDITORY perception testing; CONFERENCES &; conventions; HEARING disorders; ACOUSTIC stimulation; BRAIN stem; DISEASE risk factors; CHILDREN
- Publication
Journal of Hearing Science, 2022, Vol 12, Issue 4, p84
- ISSN
2083-389X
- Publication type
Article