SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Medeniyet Medical Journal / 2018 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 3

Threshold estimation with the P1-N1-P2 cortical auditory evoked potentials

Sıdıka CESUR
Ufuk DERINSU
Pages
177–187
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Therefore it may be suggested ALRs may be recommended as a reliable and accurate test to estimate pure tone thresholds in adults and children uncooperative to behavioural thresholds, fo-rensic cases and subjects with nonorganic hearing loss.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of the study was to compare the hearing threshold levels obtained by cortical auditory evoked responses and classic behavioral audiometry in adults with normal hearing and senso-rineural hearing loss and to investigate the intercompatibility of these two tests.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: In this study 74 adults consisting of 18 individuals with normal, and 56 impaired hearing were evaluated and threshold le-vels of ALRs obtained with both tests at 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz frequencies and behavioural thresholds were compared.Results: In adults with normal hearing any correlation between AEPs and behavioral thresholds was not found at 500 Hz, whi-le moderate, and weak correlations were detected at 1000 and 2000 Hz, also at 4000 Hz, respectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore it may be suggested ALRs may be recommended as a reliable and accurate test to estimate pure tone thresholds in adults and children uncooperative to behavioural thresholds, fo-rensic cases and subjects with nonorganic hearing loss.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Aim: The aim of the study was to compare the hearing threshold levels obtained by cortical auditory evoked responses and classic behavioral audiometry in adults with normal hearing and senso-rineural hearing loss and to investigate the intercompatibility of these two tests. Methods: In this study 74 adults consisting of 18 individuals with normal, and 56 impaired hearing were evaluated and threshold le-vels of ALRs obtained with both tests at 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz frequencies and behavioural thresholds were compared.Results: In adults with normal hearing any correlation between AEPs and behavioral thresholds was not found at 500 Hz, whi-le moderate, and weak correlations were detected at 1000 and 2000 Hz, also at 4000 Hz, respectively. While in adults with he-aring loss strong correlations were detected at all of the tested frequencies. The biggest mean difference between two tests va-lues were 5 dB in normal and 7.4 dB in individuals with hearing disorders.Conclusion: ALRs have showed good correlations in individuals with pure tone behavioral thresholds at 500, 1000, and 4000 Hz frequencies in patients with normal hearing and those with hearing loss. Therefore it may be suggested ALRs may be recommended as a reliable and accurate test to estimate pure tone thresholds in adults and children uncooperative to behavioural thresholds, fo-rensic cases and subjects with nonorganic hearing loss.

🔖

Cite This Article

CESUR, S., DERINSU, U. (2018). Threshold estimation with the P1-N1-P2 cortical auditory evoked potentials. Medeniyet Medical Journal, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 3, 177–187. https://ajindex.com/articles/283337

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Stach B. Clinical audiology: An introduction: Nelson Educati-on 2008
  2. Lin J, Staecker H. Nonorganic hearing loss. Seminars in neuro-logy: Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, USA. 2006:321-30
  3. Hall JW. Handbook of Auditory Evoked Responses: Allyn and Bacon 1992
  4. Martin FN, Clark JG. Introduction to audiology: Allyn and Ba-con Boston 1997
  5. Stephen WH, Garry N, Ivan K, et al. The use of cortical evoked response audiometry in the assessment of noise-induced hearing loss. Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. 2003;128(2):257-62.
  6. Biagio L. Slow cortical auditory evoked potentials and audi-tory steady-state evoked responses in adults exposed to oc-cupational noise. University of Pretoria 2009
  7. Biagio L, Swanepoel DW, Soer ME. Objective assessment of noise-induced hearing loss: a comparison of methods. 2009
  8. Alberti P, Hyde M, Riko K. Exaggerated hearing loss in compensation claimants. The Journal of otolaryngology. 1987;16(6):362-6
  9. Lightfoot G, Kennedy V. Cortical electric response audio-metry hearing threshold estimation: accuracy, speed, and the effects of stimulus presentation features. Ear and hea-ring. 2006;27(5):443-56.
  10. Boniver R. Slow auditory evoked potentials: the end of malingering in audiology. International Tinnitus Journal. 2002;8(1):58-61
  11. Tomlin D, Rance G, Graydon K, et al. A comparison of 40 Hz auditory steady-state response (ASSR) and cortical au-ditory evoked potential (CAEP) thresholds in awake adult subjects: Comparación de umbrales con 40 Hz ASSR y CAEP en adultos despiertos. International Journal of Audiology. 2006;45(10):580-8.
  12. Tsui B, Wong LL, Wong EC. Accuracy of cortical evoked respon-se audiometry in the identification of non-organic hearing loss: International Journal of Audiology. 2002;41(6):330-3.
  13. Hall III J. eHandbook of auditory evoked responses: Princip-les, procedures & protocols. Kindle Direct Publishing 2015
  14. Yeung KN, Wong LL. Prediction of hearing thresholds: Comparison of cortical evoked response audiometry and auditory steady state response audiometry techniques: Predicción de umbrales auditivos. Comparación entre las técnicas de Audiometría por Respuestas Evocadas Corticales y Audiometría por Respuestas Auditivas de Estado Estable. International Journal of Audiology. 2007;46(1):17-2