Brainstem auditory-evoked responses with amplification

Abstract

Brainstem auditory-evoked response (BER) measurements were obtained on adult volunteer subjects who were hearing aid users. The BER's were elicited with click stimulation in several conditions: (1) unaided via earphones, (2) unaided via speaker, and (3) aided via speaker. In the aided condition, subjects adjusted their own hearing aids to their usual comfortable listening level. Aided and unaided audiometric thresholds were also obtained on each subject using pure tones, narrow-band noise, and speech under phones, and using noise and speech in a sound field. Hearing aids were analyzed for frequency response and distortion with a series of inputs and also at user level. Comparisons were made between aided and unaided audiological and BER data. Results indicate that aided BER measurement compared favorably with aided audiological data on cooperative adults and may therefore become useful when applied to hearing aid evaluation procedures for infants and children.

The output of compression hearing aids with a transient input signal

“…However, its use in hearing aid evaluation has only recently been studied. Mokotoff & Krebs (1976) were among the first to suggest that the aided ABR has potential as a means of hearing aid fitting and evaluation. In 1983,…”

Acoustic Reflexes and Auditory Evoked Responses in Hearing Aid Evaluation

“…Auditory evoked responses (AERs) have dramatically altered the protocol and scope of clinical audiology and, not surprisingly, have also had an impact on hearing aid assessment practices (Rapin and Graziani, 1967;Spreng, 1971;Charlet de Sauvage, 1976;Leitner, 1976;Fritsche, Flach, and Knothe, 1978;Mokotoff and Krebs, 1976;Levillain, Garson, and Ler Her, 1978;Cox and Metz, 1980;Mc-Pherson, 1980;Jacobson, Seitz, Mencher, and Parrott, 1981;Kiessling, 1982Kiessling, , 1983aKiessling, , 1983bKiessling, , 1984Stecker, 1982;Hecox, 1983;McPherson and Clark, 1983;Sanders, 1983;Mahoney, 1985). At this time, however, some of the accounts of AERs in hearing aid assessment are preliminary, based on limited numbers of subjects and describe experience only with the ABR.…”

“…Conclusions included: (1) ABR latency was useful in adjusting dynamic range of the hearing aid, for example, an ABR wave V latency of 6.5 msec was found at approximately 60 percent of the effective dynamic range and the LDL was found at approximately 5.3 msec. Compression amplification should limit latency to greater 259 Mokotoff and Krebs, 1976McPherson, 1980Cox and Metz, 1980Kileny, 1982Kiessling, 1982Kiessling, 1983McPherson and Clark, 1983Hecox, 1983Sanders, 1983Mahoney, 1985 ACOUSTIC REFLEXES AND AUDITORY EVOKED RESPONSES-HALL than 5.3 msec;…”

“…On the contrary, there are virtually as many distinct approaches as there are articles on the topic. Procedures range from a straightforward comparison of threshold levels for the unaided versus aided ABR (Mokotoff and Krebs, 1976) to comparison of the slope of complete latency-intensity functions under the two conditions (Hecox, 1983). Uniquely, Kiessling (1984) relies entirely on unaided ABR amplitude-intensity data for determination of the need for amplification and appropriate hearing aid settings.…”

The use of auditory brainstem responses in determining the maximum outputs of hearing aids

“…Recently, a new use of ABR has surfaced--namely that of using ABR in the fitting of hearing aids (Mokotoff & Krebs, 1976: Cox & Metz, 1980: Kiessling, 1982: Kileny, 1982: Hecox, 1983: McPherson & Clark, 1983: Mahoney, 1985: Beauchaine, Gorga, Reiland & Larson, 1986. The ability to fit hearing aids by ABR, rather than by traditional behavioral methods, would have the greatest impact on preverbal children who are unable to respond to the traditional behavioral methods by which a hearing aid is prescribed.…”