2010
DOI: 10.1590/s0104-56872010000400010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Padronização do potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico utilizando um novo equipamento

Abstract: The components of BAEP with the NDD in normal-hearing subjects were similar regarding the tested ears, with statistically lower latencies in women. The BAEP latencies in the same individual with NDD were similar to those obtained with the EP15 / Interacoustics. Normal values of BAEP were obtained in normal-hearing adults.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
3
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Such findings corroborate those of previous studies in which no statistically significant differences were found between the ears for latency values of the BAEP and P300 in audiologically normal individuals and in individuals with Down syndrome (21,22) . These results reinforce the fact that, for individuals with DS, the reference values and analysis criteria for the BAEP and P300 with non-complex stimuli (clicks and tone burst) can be used equally for both ears, as it already occurs in clinical practice in individuals with typical development.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Such findings corroborate those of previous studies in which no statistically significant differences were found between the ears for latency values of the BAEP and P300 in audiologically normal individuals and in individuals with Down syndrome (21,22) . These results reinforce the fact that, for individuals with DS, the reference values and analysis criteria for the BAEP and P300 with non-complex stimuli (clicks and tone burst) can be used equally for both ears, as it already occurs in clinical practice in individuals with typical development.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The values found from this identification were recorded in a protocol and classified as normal and altered according to the presence and latencies of waves I, III, and V, as well as the I-III, III-V and I-V interpeak intervals and interaural difference of the I-V interpeak interval, according to the biological calibration and audiometry of the patients (13)(14)(15)(16) . The BAEP was considered altered when the values were greater than those obtained in the biological calibration, in relation to the analyzed patterns, on at least one side, or when they presented interaural intensity difference >0.3 (13,15) .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the electrophysiological records in the Integrity system were compatible with those of a The time of examination in movement is higher than at rest (p < 0.001), in both ears gold standard equipment available in the market, with respect to the average variable of the absolute latencies of the I, III, and V waves and the interpeak latencies I-III, III-V, and IV. According to the literature (24,25,26) the average values of the latencies of wave I range between 1.50 and 1.68 ms, those of wave III range between 3.50 and 3.80 ms, and those of wave V range between 5.50 and 5.64.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%