Literature DB >> 23072963

Auditory brainstem responses to level-specific chirps in normal-hearing adults.

Sinnet G B Kristensen1, Claus Elberling.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Upward chirps are often designed to compensate for the cochlear traveling wave delay which is regarded as independent of stimulation level. A chirp based on a traveling wave model is therefore referred to as a level-independent chirp. Another compensation strategy, for instance based on frequency-specific auditory brainstem response (ABR) latencies, results in a chirp that changes with stimulation level and is therefore referred to as a level-dependent chirp. One such strategy, the direct approach, results in a chirp family that is called the level-specific chirp. The level dependence is in agreement with the findings that the chirp, which generates the largest ABR in normal-hearing adults, has a duration (sweeping rate) that changes with stimulus level. A direct comparison of ABRs to a fixed chirp and to a level-specific chirp has not been performed at higher levels of stimulation where the differences are thought to have the greatest effect on the ABR characteristics from normal-hearing adults.
PURPOSE: To make a direct comparison of the ABRs to two different chirp stimuli-a level-specific chirp (LS-Chirp) and a level-independent chirp (CE-Chirp)-and to evaluate the hypothesis that at higher levels of stimulation the LS-Chirp generates significantly higher response amplitudes, and produces higher resolution of the different peaks in the ABR than the CE-Chirp. RESEARCH
DESIGN: ABRs are recorded in 10 normal-hearing adults (20 ears) in response to three stimuli at four presentation levels using ER-3A insert earphones. The three stimuli are (1) a level-specific chirp (LS-Chirp), (2) a level-independent chirp (CE-Chirp), and (3) a standard 100-μs click as a reference. The recorded ABRs are evaluated by the peak to trough amplitude (wave V), the peak latency (wave V), the frequency of appearance of wave I, III, and V, and the Grand Average waveforms. Amplitude and latency differences are evaluated statistically by the Wilcoxon matched-pair signed rank test.
RESULTS: At higher levels (80 dB nHL), the amplitude and waveform resolution of the ABR to the LS-Chirp are significantly higher than to the CE-Chirp. At lower levels (20, 40, and 60 dB nHL), no significant differences are found between the amplitudes of the ABR to the two stimuli, but at 60 dB nHL the waveform resolution is better for the LS-Chirp than for the CE-Chirp. For all levels, the amplitude of the ABRs to the two chirps are significantly larger than to the Click, except at 80 dB nHL where the ABR to the CE-Chirp gets distorted and low in amplitude. The differences between the ABR latencies to the three stimuli are large at higher levels, but small at lower levels. At higher levels, the LS-Chirp and the Click generate similar resolutions of the main ABR peaks, but the ABRs to the LS-Chirp are significantly larger than to the Click.
CONCLUSIONS: The study confirms the experimental hypothesis that at higher levels of stimulation the LS-Chirp generates significantly higher response amplitudes than both the CE-Chirp and the Click. It also generates a much better response resolution than the CE-Chirp, but the same response resolution as the Click. American Academy of Audiology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23072963     DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.23.9.5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  10 in total

1.  Comparison of chirp versus click and tone pip stimulation for cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials.

Authors:  Bo-Chen Wang; Yong Liang; Xiao-Long Liu; Jing Zhao; You-Li Liu; Yan-Fei Li; Wei Zhang; Qi Li
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Band limited chirp stimulation in vestibular evoked myogenic potentials.

Authors:  Leif Erik Walther; Mario Cebulla
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Contralateral Inhibition of Click- and Chirp-Evoked Human Compound Action Potentials.

Authors:  Spencer B Smith; Jeffery T Lichtenhan; Barbara K Cone
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 4.677

4.  A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level.

Authors:  Devan A Keesling; Jordan Paige Parker; Jason Tait Sanchez
Journal:  Audiol Res       Date:  2017-02-01

5.  Evaluation of Speed and Accuracy of Next-Generation Auditory Steady State Response and Auditory Brainstem Response Audiometry in Children With Normal Hearing and Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Yvonne S Sininger; Lisa L Hunter; Deborah Hayes; Patricia A Roush; Kristin M Uhler
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Test-Retest Reliability of Level-Specific CE-Chirp Auditory Brainstem Response in Normal-Hearing Adults.

Authors:  Fatin Nabilah Jamal; Ahmad Aidil Arafat Dzulkarnain; Fatin Amira Shahrudin; Muhammad Nasrullah Marzuki
Journal:  J Audiol Otol       Date:  2020-06-25

7.  Active Middle Ear Implant Evoked Auditory Brainstem Response Intensity-Latency Characteristics.

Authors:  Laura Fröhlich; Alexander Müller; Miriam H Kropp; Parwis Mir-Salim; Oliver Dziemba; Tobias Oberhoffner; Stefan K Plontke; Torsten Rahne
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 4.003

8.  Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) Findings With Click and CE-Chirp Stimulations in Noise-Exposed Participants.

Authors:  Mohd Normani Zakaria; Noor Alaudin Abdul Wahab; Mahamad Almyzan Awang
Journal:  Noise Health       Date:  2017 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 0.867

9.  Use of an Extra-Tympanic Membrane Electrode to Record Cochlear Microphonics with Click, Tone Burst and Chirp Stimuli.

Authors:  Laura M Coraci; Andy J Beynon
Journal:  Audiol Res       Date:  2021-03-01

10.  LS CE-Chirp® vs. Click in the neuroaudiological diagnosis by ABR.

Authors:  Michelle Cargnelutti; Pedro Luis Cóser; Eliara Pinto Vieira Biaggio
Journal:  Braz J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-05-31
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.