Introduction  The auditory system consists of sensory structures and central connections. The evaluation of the auditory pathway at a central level can be performed through behavioral and electrophysiological tests, because they are complementary to each other and provide important information about comprehension. Objective  To correlate the findings of speech brainstem-evoked response audiometry with the behavioral tests Random Gap Detection Test and Masking Level Difference in adults with hearing loss. Methods  All patients were submitted to a basic audiological evaluation, to the aforementioned behavioral tests, and to an electrophysiological assessment, by means of click-evoked and speech-evoked brainstem response audiometry. Results  There were no statistically significant values among the electrophysiological test and the behavioral tests. However, there was a significant correlation between the V and A waves, as well as the D and F waves, of the speech-evoked brainstem response audiometry peaks. Such correlations are positive, indicating that the increase of a variable implies an increase in another and vice versa. Conclusion  It was possible to correlate the findings of the speech-evoked brainstem response audiometry with those of the behavioral tests Random Gap Detection and Masking Level Difference. However, there was no statistically significant correlation between them. This shows that the electrophysiological evaluation does not depend uniquely on the behavioral skills of temporal resolution and selective attention.

Purpose: to generate reference values for different behavioral central auditory processing (CAP) tests in normally hearing adults, with age stratification, as well as to compare the results, according to the presence or absence of CAP disorder (CAPD). Methods: the study sample consisted of 94 adults with normal auditory thresholds, with at least 11 years of schooling, who were divided into two groups, according to the performance in the Dichotic Sentences Identification Test (DSI), Masking Level Difference (MLD), Random Gap Detection Test (RGDT), Adapted Time-Compressed Speech (ATCS) and Duration and Frequency Pattern Tests (DPT/FPT).The 64 subjects who presented normality in all the tests formed the G1 group and the 30 subjects who presented alteration in at least one of them, originated the G2 group. To accomplish the analysis it was used the Mann-Whitney U Test. In all analyzes, the significance level was 5% (p≤0.05). Results: the sum of the two standard deviations for the mean performance of G1 yielded reference values for the different tests addressed. When G1 and G2 groups were compared, G1 presented better results, this being significant in the DSI (left ear), MLD, RGDT, DPT and FPT tests, for the group aged between 18 and 29 years and, DSI (right ear), RGDT and ATCS (right ear), for the group from 30 to 58 years. Conclusion: it was possible to generate reference values for different behavioral tests of CAP in normally hearing adults, as well as to verify a better performance for the group with no CAPD.

Introduction  The use of the speech-evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR) shows how the brainstem operates up to the subcortex in a more complex manner than when the click-evoked ABR is used. Objective  To study the applicability of the speech-evoked ABR in adults with hearing loss. Methods  The sample was composed of a study group of 11 subjects, with ages ranging between 18 and 59 years, and auditory thresholds within normal standards, with loss of up to 65 dB at high frequencies or up to moderately severe symmetric sensorineural hearing loss. The sample underwent a basic audiological assessment, as well as speech-evoked ABR and click-evoked ABR, in which waves I, III and V, and V, A, C, D, E, F were respectively marked. The electrophysiological assessments were performed using the SmartEP device (Intelligent Hearing Systems, Miami, FL, US). Results  For the speech-evoked ABR, the reference values were used in the identification and analysis of the study group. Those values found for the study group were: V = 8.56; A = 10.97; C = 21.33; D = 29.51; E = 37.93; F = 46.96; and O = 55.97. In the comparison between groups, the study group presented an increase in latency only in wave C. Conclusion  The speech-evoked ABR can be performed in subjects with up to moderately severe hearing loss, and the test proved to be appropriate, because, unlike the click-evoked ABR, the former does not suffer influence of peripheral hearing loss.

Purpose: detecting the sensitivity to evaluate the temporal resolution ability, by comparing Randon Gap Detection Test (RGDT) and Gaps-In-Noise (GIN) tests, in addition to suggesting reference values in these tests for elderly people. Methods: 38 elderly people, 24 women and 14 men, aged between 60 and 82 years, with normal hearing or sensorineural to moderate hearing loss; with symmetry between the ears; Type A tympanogram, acoustic reflex, with auditory processing complaints. All patients underwent basic evaluations to characterize the peripheral hearing -RGDT and GIN. Results: the sensitivity found for RGDT regarding the identification of the temporal resolution ability was 88.64% and 67.65% in GIN.

Introduction  Frequency-following response with speech stimulus (FFR-speech) is a subcortical potential that satisfactorily evaluates the processing of verbal information. However, there still are differences in the literature regarding its analysis and stimulation protocol. Objective  To compare two stimulation protocols for the capture of FFR-speech, to identify the percentage of occurrence of the waves among them and to compare it with the specialized literature, as well as to describe the interpeaks of its waves. Method  Considering the eligibility criteria, the sample consisted of 30 normal-hearing adults, with no complaints of speech comprehension. All of them were submitted to a basic audiological evaluation, to brainstem auditory evoked potential with click stimulus, and to FFR-speech. In the latter, 2 types of stimulation were performed, 3 series of 1,000 sweeps, and 2 series of 3,000 sweeps, for subsequent analysis of the resulting wave, in which we tried to mark the peak V followed by valleys A, C, D, E, F, and O. Results  Differences in latency and interpeaks were not found between the protocols. In general, a higher occurrence of waves in the stimulation of 2 series of 3,000 sweeps was observed, but only the A valley presented a significant difference. When the values of the waves were compared with the literature, the V and A waves showed fewer occurrences in the present study. Conclusion  The protocol of 2 series of 3,000 sweeps was better for FFR-speech in the studied equipment, considering the higher occurrence of waves, even though it is inferior to the specialized literature. Furthermore, it was possible to describe interpeak values and to observe no difference between the studied protocols

Objective: to generate reference values for different central auditory processing tests, investigating the influence of peripheral hearing and considering education and cognition, in the elderly. Methods: a prospective, quantitative and cross-sectional study. The casuistry consisted of 23 elderly, aged between 60 and 81 years old, being 8 men and 14 women. Regarding the audiological characteristics, the elderly were included with normal auditory thresholds or mild and moderate sensorineural hearing loss, classified by the quadritonal average, proposed by the World Health Organization. All elderly underwent Basic Audiological Evaluation, Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, Mini Mental State Examination, and seven central auditory behavioral tests. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test. Results: the Adapted Time-Compressed Speech Test was influenced by the peripheral hearing loss, in both ears (p-value = 0,000), and no significant differences were found in the other data analyzed. Conclusion: reference values were generated for the different behavioral tests. Hearing loss influenced the results of the Adapted Time-Compressed Speech Test, suggesting that it should not be applied in the elderly with peripheral alteration. Regarding education and cognition, there was a similarity among the elderly with normal hearing thresholds and those presented with hearing loss.

Objective To analyze age-related changes in the central auditory pathway in healthy elderly individuals. Methods A prospective, quantitative cross-sectional study. The caseload comprised 18 adults (mean age, 22.78 years) and 18 elderly individuals (mean age, 66.72 years) of both sexes, who met inclusion criteria. Subjects were submitted to basic audiological evaluation and related electrophysiologic tests: brainstem auditory evoked potential with click stimulus and frequency-following response. Results Elderly individuals had higher wave and interpeak latencies (waves I, III and V and interpeaks I-V and III-V) of brainstem auditory evoked potential. Latencies of frequency following response waves A, E, F and O were also higher in elderly individuals. Frequency following response amplitudes were better in A than in D, F and O waves in these subjects. Likewise, interpeak intervals (V-A and V-O) were larger in elderly relative to adult individuals. Lower slope values were observed in elderly individuals. Conclusion Brainstem auditory evoked potential and frequency-following response allowed appropriate assessment of age-related changes in the auditory pathway. Slower neural response to auditory stimuli suggests reduced synchrony between neural structures.