Literature DB >> 2782925

Click evoked otoacoustic emissions compared with brain stem electric response.

J C Stevens1, H D Webb, J Hutchinson, J Connell, M F Smith, J T Buffin.   

Abstract

The hearing of 346 babies taken largely from a neonatal intensive care unit has been tested by otoacoustic emissions and brain stem electric response audiometry. A total of 336 (97%) of the babies have been followed up by hearing tests from the age of 8 months. The otoacoustic emission test has been found to be practical with a mean test time of 12.1 minutes compared with 21.0 minutes for brain stem electric response. An otoacoustic emission was recorded bilaterally in 274 (79%) babies. Twenty of the 21 surviving infants who failed brain stem electric response in the neonatal period did not produce an emission. It is concluded that the otoacoustic emission test would make a good first screen to be followed by the brain stem electric response if no otoacoustic emission was present. There is poor agreement between the test results in the neonatal period and those of the follow up period, however, indicating the need for continuous monitoring of those babies failed by brain stem electric response.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2782925      PMCID: PMC1792539          DOI: 10.1136/adc.64.8.1105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Dis Child        ISSN: 0003-9888            Impact factor:   3.791


  14 in total

1.  Click-evoked oto-acoustic emissions in normal and hearing-impaired adults.

Authors:  J C Stevens
Journal:  Br J Audiol       Date:  1988-02

2.  Unexpected hearing loss in high-risk infants.

Authors:  T A Nield; S Schrier; A D Ramos; A C Platzker; D Warburton
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 7.124

3.  Acoustic emission cochleography--practical aspects.

Authors:  D T Kemp; P Bray; L Alexander; A M Brown
Journal:  Scand Audiol Suppl       Date:  1986

4.  Evoked acoustic emission: clinical application.

Authors:  C Elberling; J Parbo; N J Johnsen; P Bagi
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol Suppl       Date:  1985

5.  Auditory screening of special care neonates using the auditory response cradle.

Authors:  B McCormick; D A Curnock; F Spavins
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 3.791

6.  Evoked acoustic emissions from the human ear. III. Findings in neonates.

Authors:  N J Johnsen; P Bagi; C Elberling
Journal:  Scand Audiol       Date:  1983

7.  Hearing screening by health visitors: a critical appraisal of the distraction test.

Authors:  B McCormick
Journal:  Health Visit       Date:  1983-12

8.  The auditory brain stem response reliably predicts hearing loss in graduates of a tertiary intensive care nursery.

Authors:  R Galambos; G E Hicks; M J Wilson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1984 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  A comparison of oto-acoustic emissions and brain stem electric response audiometry in the normal newborn and babies admitted to a special care baby unit.

Authors:  J C Stevens; H D Webb; M F Smith; J T Buffin; H Ruddy
Journal:  Clin Phys Physiol Meas       Date:  1987-05

10.  Applications of surface-recorded auditory evoked potentials for the early diagnosis of hearing loss in neonates and premature infants.

Authors:  J M Guerit
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol Suppl       Date:  1985
View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Hearing screening in children--state of the art(s)

Authors:  M P Haggard
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Neonatal otoacoustic emission screening and the identification of deafness.

Authors:  P M Watkin
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 5.747

3.  Otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem responses in the newborn.

Authors:  C R Kennedy; L Kimm; D C Dees; P I Evans; M Hunter; S Lenton; R D Thornton
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 4.  The senses of the newborn.

Authors:  D A Curnock
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-12-16

Review 5.  Otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  M Richardson
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 3.791

6.  Late diagnosis of congenital sensorineural hearing impairment: why are detection methods failing?

Authors:  C Robertson; S Aldridge; F Jarman; K Saunders; Z Poulakis; F Oberklaid
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 3.791

7.  Neonatal at risk screening and the identification of deafness.

Authors:  P M Watkin; M Baldwin; G McEnery
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 3.791

8.  Reliability and effectiveness of screening for hearing loss in high risk neonates.

Authors:  R J McClelland; D R Watson; V Lawless; H G Houston; D Adams
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-03-28

9.  Otoacoustic emissions as a screening test for hearing impairment in children.

Authors:  M P Richardson; T J Williamson; S W Lenton; M J Tarlow; P T Rudd
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 3.791

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.