Limiar diferencial de mascaramento: valores de referência em adultos

Self Cite

Introduction Turner syndrome (TS) affects ∼ 1 in 2,500 live births. The presence of hearing alterations is one of the comorbidities found in this syndrome. Objective The present study aimed to evaluate the central auditory abilities in TS and to associate the alterations found with the cytogenetic pattern of the syndrome. Methods We included children and adults aged 9 to 39 years old, diagnosed with TS, with numerical or structural alterations of sex chromosomes in their karyotype. A battery of behavioral tests of central auditory processing (CAP) was performed, including a test within the modalities: monoaural low-redundancy, dichotic listening, binaural interaction, and temporal processing (resolution and ordering). We studied auditory skills in the total sample and in the sample stratified by age, divided into groups: G1 (9 to 13 years old), G2 (14 to 19 years old), and G3 (20 to 31 years old). For the association of the cytogenetic pattern, the division was T1 (chromosome monosomy X), and T2 (other TS cytogenetic patterns). Statistical analysis presented data expressed as median and interquartile range for numerical data and as frequency and percentage for categorical data. Results We found alterations in four auditory skills in the three age groups, but there was a statistically significant difference between the age groups only in the Gaps in Noise Test (GIN) (p-value = 0.009). Regarding karyotype, a greater number of alterations in the T1 cytogenetic pattern (chromosome monosomy X) was observed in four auditory skills, but without a statistically significant difference. Conclusion The alterations found point to an impairment in CAP in TS.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The test was considered altered when the threshold was < 10 dB. 28 The auditory skill assessed was binaural interaction. 15 We chose to study the central auditory skills in the overall sample and then in the sample stratified by age to verify if there was a difference in performance in the behavioral tests in each group.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral Assessment of Central Auditory Processing in Turner Syndrome

Santos,

Bazilio,

Frota

et al. 2023

Self Cite

“…The normative values suggested by Pereira et al, 10 Auditec, 11 and Mendes et al, 12 were considered in the auditory processing exam. Only individuals with normal audiological assessment and auditory processing assessment were selected to participate in the second stage of the study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standardization of Latency and Amplitude Values of Short, Middle and Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potentials in Adults

Pelaquim

Sanfins

Fornazieri

2023

Introduction Auditory processing refers to the efficiency and effectiveness with which the central auditory nervous system uses auditory information. Middle- and long-latency auditory evoked potentials are objective electrophysiological tests that can complement the diagnosis of alterations involving central auditory processing. Objective To standardize latency and amplitude values for short-, middle-, and long-latency auditory evoked potentials in adults with normal hearing thresholds. Methods This is a cross-sectional study. Thirty-three adults with normal hearing thresholds, without hearing complaints, and with normal central auditory processing were evaluated. All underwent basic audiological evaluation, central auditory processing assessment, and short-, middle-, and long-latency auditory evoked potentials. Results Absolute latency and interpeak values for middle- and long-latency auditory evoked potentials were lower than internationally suggested. However, for the brainstem auditory evoked potential, the means were within the range considered as normal, as suggested in the equipment. Conclusion The present study provided measurements of normal latencies and amplitudes for short-, middle-, and long-latency auditory evoked potentials in adults.

“…The normality standard considered for each test was the one proposed in the literature. [23][24][25]27…”

Section: Assessment Of Central Auditory Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in Auditory Evoked Potentials Increase the Chances of Adults Having Central Auditory Processing Disorder

Pelaquim,

Sanfins,

Fornazieri

2023

Introduction Auditory evoked potentials are widely used in clinical practice to complement the assessment of central auditory processing. However, it is necessary to understand whether these potentials are highly accurate, to assist in the diagnosis of auditory processing disorder. Objective To measure the accuracy of middle and long latency auditory evoked potentials in the diagnosis of auditory processing disorder in adults. Methods This is a case-control study, formed by a control group of 30 individuals with normal auditory processing assessment, and a case group composed of 43 individuals with altered auditory processing assessment. Their sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, positive and negative predictive values for the diagnosis of alterations were measured and compared between the potentials. Results The accuracies of the middle and long latency potentials were 51% and 67%, respectively. The P1-N1-P2 and N2-P300 complexes had an accuracy of 57.5% and 58.9%, respectively. The cognitive potential P300 showed an accuracy of 55%. There was no significant result for the middle-latency potential (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 0.6–5.4, p > 0.42) and for P300 (OR = 2.63, 95% CI: 0.85–8.43, p > 0.11). However, the result was significant for the long-latency potential (OR = 6.3; 95% CI: 2–19.6, p < 0.01). There was a significant result for the P1-N1-P2 complexes (OR = 6.76, 95% CI:1.4–32.5, p = < 0.010) and N2-P300 (OR = 3.60; 95% CI: 10.16–11.20, p < 0.039). Conclusion Individuals with altered long-latency auditory evoked potential are more likely to have auditory processing disorder and, as such, this test can be used as a complementary tool to confirm the diagnosis.