Objective Detection and Analysis of Auditory Brainstem Response: An Historical Perspective

Hyde, M. L.; Sininger, Yvonne S.; Don, Manuel

doi:10.1055/s-0028-1082960

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…39,40 Screening technologies that incorporate automated-response detection are necessary to eliminate the need for individual test interpretation, to reduce the effects of screener bias or operator error on test outcome, and to ensure test consistency across infants, test conditions, and screening personnel. [41][42][43][44][45] When statistical probability is used to make pass/fail decisions, as is the case for OAE and automated ABR screening devices, the likelihood of obtaining a pass outcome by chance alone is increased when screening is performed repeatedly.…”

Section: Hearing Screeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Hearing Screeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…work to detect tone-evoked ABRs (Hyde, Sininger & Don, 1998). The two main disadvantages of the tone-ABR are (1) it is time-consuming because only one ear and one frequency at a time can be tested, and (2) response detection is subjective, allowing for error in judgment of the presence/absence of responses, depending on the experience and skill of the clinician (Stapells, 2000a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Artifactual Responses When Recording Auditory Steady-State Responses

Small

Stapells

2004

Ear and Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The goal of this study was to investigate, in hearing-impaired participants who could not hear the stimuli, the possibility of artifactual auditory steady-state responses (ASSRs) when stimuli are presented at high intensities.Design: ASSRs to single (60 dB HL) and multiple (20 to 50 dB HL; 500 to 4000 Hz) bone-conduction stimuli as well as single 114 to 120 dB HL air-conduction stimuli, were obtained using the Rotman MASTER system, using analog-to-digital (A/D) conversion rates of 500, 1000, and 1250 Hz. Responses (p < 0.05) were considered artifactual when their numbers exceeded that expected by chance. In some conditions, we also obtained ASSRs to "alternated" stimuli (stimuli inverted and ASSRs to the two polarities averaged). A total of 17 subjects were tested. Conclusions: High-intensity air-or bone-conduction stimuli can produce spurious ASSRs, especially for 500 and 1000 Hz carrier frequencies. High-amplitude stimulus artifact can result in energy that is aliased to exactly the modulation frequency. Choice of signal conditioning (electroencephalogram filter slope and low-pass cutoff) and processing (A/D rate) can avoid spurious responses due to aliasing. However, artifactual responses due to other causes may still occur for bone-conduction stimuli 50 dB HL and higher (and possibly for high-level air conduction). Because the phases of these spurious responses do not invert with inversion of stimulus, the possibility of nonauditory physiologic responses cannot be ruled out. The clinical implications of these results are that artifactual responses may occur for any patient for bone-conduction stimuli at levels greater than 40 dB HL and for highintensity air-conduction stimuli used to assess patients with profound hearing loss. Results

show abstract

“…Experienced observers can show good abilities for waveform pattern-recognition and thus distinguish responses at near threshold levels, but this interpretation of waveforms is subject to observer bias. There are algorithmic, statistical methods which can be employed in computer software to detect responses (Hyde et al, 1998). These methods have been employed in newborn hearing screening and also in diagnostic applications of the ABR, but these algorithms have not yet been optimized for infant ABRs in response to tonebursts.…”

Section: Limitations Of Ecog and Abrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pediatric audiology: A review of assessment methods for infants

Cone‐Wesson

2003

Audiological Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cone-Wesson B. Pediatric Audiology: a Review of Assessment Methods for Infants. Audiological Medicine 2003; 1: 175-184.Behavioral, electrophysiological and electroacoustic methods of assessing hearing in infants and young children are reviewed. Pediatric hearing evaluations include determination of pure tone thresholds and speech perception abilities. Behavioral methods for determining pure tone thresholds are based upon operant conditioning techniques and are applicable for infants aged 6 to 24 months of age. Below that age, behavioral observation of the infant's response to sound will yield unrepeatable results unless the rigors of an observer-based psychophysical procedure are adopted. Electrophysiological methods for estimating hearing threshold include electrocochleography, auditory brainstem response and auditory steady-state responses. Electroacoustic methods include measurement of evoked otoacoustic emissions that indicate the integrity of cochlear outer hair cells. There is a heavy reliance upon electrophysiological and electroacoustic methods for infants too young (i.e. <6 months) or those with visual or motor impairments that preclude testing with behavioral techniques. Methods for assessing infant speech perception abilities are not well developed. Standardized tests of speech sound discrimination require a receptive language age of nearly 3 years. Speech sound discrimination may be tested using a visual-reinforcement procedure similar to that used for threshold tests; however, the stimuli and response recording methods do not have widespread clinical use at this time. Event-related (evoked) potentials to speech sounds offer promise as a method for assessing speech perception abilities, but the variability of results limits the technique to evaluating group (not individual) performance.

show abstract

Objective Detection and Analysis of Auditory Brainstem Response: An Historical Perspective

Cited by 21 publications

References 30 publications

Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs

Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs

Artifactual Responses When Recording Auditory Steady-State Responses

Pediatric audiology: A review of assessment methods for infants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About