Literature DB >> 28147590

Compensating for ear-canal acoustics when measuring otoacoustic emissions.

Karolina K Charaziak1, Christopher A Shera1.   

Abstract

Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) provide an acoustic fingerprint of the inner ear, and changes in this fingerprint may indicate changes in cochlear function arising from efferent modulation, aging, noise trauma, and/or exposure to harmful agents. However, the reproducibility and diagnostic power of OAE measurements is compromised by the variable acoustics of the ear canal, in particular, by multiple reflections and the emergence of standing waves at relevant frequencies. Even when stimulus levels are controlled using methods that circumvent standing-wave problems (e.g., forward-pressure-level calibration), distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) levels vary with probe location by 10-15 dB near half-wave resonant frequencies. The method presented here estimates the initial outgoing OAE pressure wave at the eardrum from measurements of the conventional OAE, allowing one to separate the emitted OAE from the many reflections trapped in the ear canal. The emitted pressure level (EPL) represents the OAE level that would be recorded were the ear canal replaced by an infinite tube with no reflections. When DPOAEs are expressed using EPL, their variation with probe location decreases to the test-retest repeatability of measurements obtained at similar probe positions. EPL provides a powerful way to reduce the variability of OAE measurements and improve their ability to detect cochlear changes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28147590      PMCID: PMC5848844          DOI: 10.1121/1.4973618

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  60 in total

1.  Influence of calibration method on distortion-product otoacoustic emission measurements: II. threshold prediction.

Authors:  Abigail R Rogers; Sienna R Burke; Judy G Kopun; Hongyang Tan; Stephen T Neely; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Optimizing swept-tone protocols for recording distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in adults and newborns.

Authors:  Carolina Abdala; Ping Luo; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Non-invasive estimation of middle-ear input impedance and efficiency.

Authors:  James D Lewis; Stephen T Neely
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Sound pressure distribution and power flow within the gerbil ear canal from 100 Hz to 80 kHz.

Authors:  Michael E Ravicz; Elizabeth S Olson; John J Rosowski
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 5.  Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs.

Authors:  C A Shera; J J Guinan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Controlled exploration of the effects of conductive hearing loss on wideband acoustic immittance in human cadaveric preparations.

Authors:  Gabrielle R Merchant; Saumil N Merchant; John J Rosowski; Hideko Heidi Nakajima
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Effects of ear-canal standing waves on measurements of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  M L Whitehead; B B Stagner; B L Lonsbury-Martin; G K Martin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Measurement of the acoustic input immittance of the human ear.

Authors:  W M Rabinowitz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 9.  Serial Monitoring of Otoacoustic Emissions in Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Dawn Konrad-Martin; Gayla L Poling; Laura E Dreisbach; Kelly M Reavis; Garnett P McMillan; Judi A Lapsley Miller; Lynne Marshall
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.311

10.  An in-situ calibration method and the effects on stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Shixiong Chen; Haoshi Zhang; Lan Wang; Guanglin Li
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 2.819

View more
  17 in total

1.  High frequency transient-evoked otoacoustic emission measurements using chirp and click stimuli.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; M Patrick Feeney; Lisa L Hunter; Denis F Fitzpatrick; Chelsea M Blankenship; Angela C Garinis; Daniel B Putterman; Marcin Wróblewski
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Sound pressure distribution within human ear canals: II. Reverse mechanical stimulation.

Authors:  Michael E Ravicz; Jeffrey Tao Cheng; John J Rosowski
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Effects of Forward- and Emitted-Pressure Calibrations on the Variability of Otoacoustic Emission Measurements Across Repeated Probe Fits.

Authors:  Tom Maxim; Christopher A Shera; Karolina K Charaziak; Carolina Abdala
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Non-Invasive Assays of Cochlear Synaptopathy - Candidates and Considerations.

Authors:  Hari M Bharadwaj; Alexandra R Mai; Jennifer M Simpson; Inyong Choi; Michael G Heinz; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 3.590

5.  A comparison of ear-canal-reflectance measurement methods in an ear simulator.

Authors:  Kren Rahbek Nørgaard; Karolina K Charaziak; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  On the calculation of reflectance in non-uniform ear canals.

Authors:  Kren Rahbek Nørgaard; Karolina K Charaziak; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  A cochlea with three parts? Evidence from otoacoustic emission phase in humans.

Authors:  Anders T Christensen; Carolina Abdala; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Probing Apical-Basal Differences in the Human Cochlea Using Distortion-Product Otoacoustic Emission Phase.

Authors:  Anders T Christensen; Carolina Abdala; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  AIP Conf Proc       Date:  2018-05-31

9.  A systematic study on effects of calibration-waveguide geometry and least-squares formulation on ear-probe source calibrations.

Authors:  Kren Monrad Nørgaard; Joshua J Hajicek
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Reflection-Source Emissions Evoked with Clicks and Frequency Sweeps: Comparisons Across Levels.

Authors:  Karolina K Charaziak; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-10-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.