Neonate Auditory Brainstem Responses to CE-Chirp and CE-Chirp Octave Band Stimuli II: Versus Adult Auditory Brainstem Responses

Cobb, Kensi M.; Stuart, Andrew

doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000000344

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, there was no consensus on the influence of stimulus polarities on the ABR findings. However, few studies reported no difference among stimulus polarities in the ABR to the click stimulus [16,18] and a similar finding was also reported in a single study conducted using rising chirp stimulus [24]. The discrepancy could be because of the interaction of other test parameters with polarities such as stimulus repetition rate, filtering, and artifact rejection that could be different across these studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…There is only one study reported the influence of stimulus polarity on the ABR via upward chirp stimulus [24]. This study investigated the influence of stimulus polarity on the ABR alongside other factors including stimulus rate, type of stimulus, frequency, and intensity levels in 168 neonates and 20 adults.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is in-contrast to the higher percentage of ABR wave I and III to be present in the ABR rarefaction polarity in their adult subject. Few studies have reported the influence of stimulus polarity in the ABR to click or tone burst stimuli [14][15][16][17] and one study on the ABR to upward chirp stimulus [24], however, there was no study on the influence of ABR elicited from LS chirp stimulus. Hypothetically the influence of stimulus polarity could be different between the ABR elicited from the click and chirp stimuli in general and LS chirp specifically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Influence of Stimulus Polarity on the Auditory Brainstem Response From Level-Specific Chirp

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: No known studies have investigated the influence of stimulus polarity on the Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) elicited from level-specific (LS) chirp. This study is important as it provides a better understanding of the stimulus polarity selection for ABR elicited from LS chirp stimulus. We explored the influence of stimulus polarity on the ABR from LS chirp compared to the ABR from click at 80 dBnHL in normal-hearing adults.Subjects and Methods: Nineteen adults with normal hearing participated. The ABRs were acquired using click and LS chirp stimuli using three stimulus polarities (rarefaction, condensation, and alternating) at 80 dBnHL. The ABRs were tested only on the right ear at a stimulus rate of 33.33 Hz. The ABR test was stopped when the recording reached the residual noise level of 0.04 µV. The ABRs amplitudes, absolute latencies, inter-peak latencies (IPLs), and the recorded number of averages were statistically compared among ABRs at different stimulus polarities and stimuli combinations.Results: Rarefaction polarity had the largest ABR amplitudes and SNRs compared with other stimulus polarities in both stimuli. There were marginal differences in the absolute latencies and IPLs among stimulus polarities. No significant difference in the number of averages required to reach the stopping criteria was found.Conclusions: Stimulus polarities have a significant influence on the ABR to LS chirp. Rarefaction polarity is recommended for clinical use because of its larger ABR peak I, III, and V amplitudes than those of the other stimulus polarities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of Stimulus Polarity on the Auditory Brainstem Response From Level-Specific Chirp

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the contrary, Cobb and Stuart [14] reported significant longer CE-chirp latencies than corresponding click for wave V at 60 and 45 dB, the repetition rate was 57.7/s, to which, the difference can be attributed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

The difference between Chirp & Click stimulation in Diagnostic Auditory Brainstem Response in assessment of hearing among age group between 1-10 years Iraqi children

Hamo¹,

Tohi²,

Alogaidi³

2021

JUSST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Aim: To compare the response of human auditory brain stem evoked by clicks stimuli and chirps. Patients and Methods: A study of cross-sectional design was chosen to evaluate the objective of the study. Children between 1-10 years were enrolled from the attendants of the Dept. of Surgery and Audiology, Al-Jamhoori Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health /Nineveh health Directorate, and the outpatient clinics in al-alwiyah teaching hospital for children and done in the privet clinics of the researchers. The data collection extended over the period from 2019 January to 2020 August. A total number of 70 children involved in the study according to the parents’ complaints, full history taken and the clinical examination by otoscopy. The probable conductive problem excluded by using the Tympanometry. Moreover, free field test was done before chirp and click. Paired t-test was used for the statistical analysis. Results: The males represent (44.3%) and the females (55.7%). The mean age of children included was 49 months ± 27.7 SD. Wave V of the chirp shows lower latency means in all intensities in comparison with that of click stimuli. While waves I and III, show longer latency as the intensity go down, but the differences between chirp and click are insignificant. Wave V amplitudes getting lower values as the intensity decreasing in both chirp and click and become significantly higher than that of click. Wave I and III show decreasing amplitudes with the decreasing intensity in both chirp and click, with higher amplitudes in click in comparing with that of chirp, which are insignificant statistically down to below 70 dBnHL. Conclusions: The chirp stimuli are highly significant and more efficient from the click in the detection of hearing loss among the children regarding both latency and amplitude particularly at wave V.

show abstract

“…In the literature consulted, the findings of the BAEP in newborns were conflicting, when the V-wave latency values were compared between the genders. While some scholars (21,(23)(24)(25)(26) concluded that there are differences between the genders when using the CE-chirp, A-chirp, tone-burst and click stimuli, other stimuli did not present such differences (10,11,14,27,28) . The researchers who observed a difference between the genders found increased latencies for the males (23,25) and attributed this finding to the anatomical differences there are between the genders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influência do sexo nas respostas do potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico com diferentes estímulos em neonatos

Ferreira

Gardin

Barbieri

et al. 2020

Audiol., Commun. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMO Objetivo avaliar a influência da variável sexo nos valores da latência e amplitude da onda V do potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico, com diferentes estímulos em neonatos. Métodos participaram deste estudo 62 neonatos nascidos a termo (29 do sexo feminino e 33 do sexo masculino). Realizou-se a pesquisa de limiar eletrofisiológico do potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico com quatro estímulos diferentes (clique, Ichirp banda larga-BL, tone burst e Ichirp-frequência específica-FE), nas intensidades de 60, 40 e 20 dBnNA. A variável sexo foi comparada para cada estímulo e intensidade. Resultados os resultados obtidos demonstraram menor latência e maior amplitude no sexo feminino para o estímulo clique. Entretanto, para o estímulo tone burst, o sexo feminino apresentou maior latência e maior amplitude. Quando utilizados os estímulos Ichirp-BL e Ichirp-FE, a variável sexo não apresentou diferença estatisticamente significativa para os valores de latência e amplitude. Conclusão a onda V do PEATE de neonatos sofre influência da variável sexo, quando utilizados os estímulos clique e tone burst. Entretanto, não houve tal influência quando utilizado o estímulo Ichirp banda larga–BL e o estímulo Ichirp frequência específica-FE.

show abstract

Neonate Auditory Brainstem Responses to CE-Chirp and CE-Chirp Octave Band Stimuli II: Versus Adult Auditory Brainstem Responses

Cited by 6 publications

References 54 publications

Influence of Stimulus Polarity on the Auditory Brainstem Response From Level-Specific Chirp

Influence of Stimulus Polarity on the Auditory Brainstem Response From Level-Specific Chirp

The difference between Chirp & Click stimulation in Diagnostic Auditory Brainstem Response in assessment of hearing among age group between 1-10 years Iraqi children

Influência do sexo nas respostas do potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico com diferentes estímulos em neonatos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About