Literature DB >> 15604918

Effects of a suppressor tone on distortion product otoacoustic emissions fine structure: why a universal suppressor level is not a practical solution to obtaining single-generator DP-grams.

Sumitrajit Dhar1, Lauren A Shaffer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The use of a suppressor tone has been proposed as the method of choice in obtaining single-generator distortion product (DP) grams, the speculation being that such DP grams will be more predictive of hearing thresholds. Current distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) theory points to the ear canal DPOAE signal being a complex interaction between multiple components. The effectiveness of a suppressor tone is predicted to be dependent entirely on the relative levels of these components. We examine the validity of using a suppressor tone through a detailed examination of the effects of a suppressor on DPOAE fine structure in individual ears.
DESIGN: DPOAE fine structure, recorded in 10 normal-hearing individuals with a suppressor tone at 45, 55, and 65 dB SPL, was compared with recordings without a suppressor. Behavioral hearing thresholds were also measured in the same subjects, using 2-dB steps.
RESULTS: The effect of the suppressor tone on DPOAE fine structure varied between ears and was dependent on frequency within ears. Correlation between hearing thresholds and DPOAE level measured without a suppressor was similar to previous reports. The effects of the suppressor are explained in the theoretical framework of a model involving multiple DPOAE components.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that a suppressor tone can have highly variable effects on fine structure across individuals or even across frequency within one ear, thereby making the use of a suppressor less viable as a clinical tool for obtaining single-generator DP grams.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15604918     DOI: 10.1097/00003446-200412000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  14 in total

1.  Reducing reflected contributions to ear-canal distortion product otoacoustic emissions in humans.

Authors:  Tiffany A Johnson; Stephen T Neely; Judy G Kopun; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Distortion product otoacoustic emissions: cochlear-source contributions and clinical test performance.

Authors:  Tiffany A Johnson; Stephen T Neely; Judy G Kopun; Darcia M Dierking; Hongyang Tan; Connie Converse; Elizabeth Kennedy; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Relation of distortion-product otoacoustic emission input-output functions to loudness.

Authors:  Daniel M Rasetshwane; Stephen T Neely; Judy G Kopun; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Influence of stimulus parameters on amplitude-modulated stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Tiffany A Johnson; Laura Beshaler
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Distortion product otoacoustic emission phase and component analysis in human newborns.

Authors:  Carolina Abdala; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Contralateral acoustic stimulation alters the magnitude and phase of distortion product otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Ryan Deeter; Rebekah Abel; Lauren Calandruccio; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Breaking away: violation of distortion emission phase-frequency invariance at low frequencies.

Authors:  Sumitrajit Dhar; Abigail Rogers; Carolina Abdala
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  [Objective audiometry with DPOAEs : New findings for generation mechanisms and clinical applications. German version].

Authors:  D Zelle; E Dalhoff; A W Gummer
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.284

9.  Sources of variability in distortion product otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Cassie A Garner; Stephen T Neely; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Exploring the relationship between physiological measures of cochlear and brainstem function.

Authors:  S Dhar; R Abel; J Hornickel; T Nicol; E Skoe; W Zhao; N Kraus
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-04-05       Impact factor: 3.708

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.