Test/retest repeatability of effect contralateral acoustic stimulation on the magnitudes of distortion product ototacoustic emissions

Abstract

Results of the present study showed that contralateral inhibition magnitudes of DPOAEs varied considerably, even though DPOAEs magnitudes remained essentially the same across different recording sessions. As reliability is an essential aspect of any clinical procedure, it is suggested that at present contralateral inhibition of DPOAEs should not be used clinically to evaluate the medial efferent system. Laryngoscope, 2012.

Stability of the Medial Olivocochlear Reflex as Measured by Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions

“…Present results cannot be directly compared with previous studies that used DPOAEs without controlling for fine structure (Kumar et al, 2013;Wagner et al, 2005Wagner et al, , 2007Wagner et al, , 2008. Using click-evoked OAEs, de Boer and Thornton (2008) reported a mean increase in the MOC reflex of 0.63 dB on Day 4 and 0.78 dB on Day 5 when they implemented a 5-day training regimen to improve listening in adults with normal hearing.…”

“…Intrasession reliability coefficients ranged from 0.2 to 0.7, and intersession reliability ranged between 0.5 and 0.8 depending on the frequency (Kumar, Methi, & Avinash, 2013). Wagner, Frey, Heppelmann, Plontke, and Zenner (2008) examined the repeatability of two DPOAE protocols in assessing MOC efferent activity during two independent sessions.…”

“…Most research probing MOC effects on DPOAEs over approximately two decades (e.g., Kim, Frisina, & Frisina, 2002;Kumar et al, 2013;Puel & Rebillard, 1990) measured DPOAE with gross frequency resolution and overlooked the fine structure. Without due consideration of the fine structure, it is not possible to know whether the measurement data point is at a peak or a notch; different effects are observed at a peak (mostly reductions) and at a notch (enhancements).…”

Otoacoustic-emission-based medial-olivocochlear reflex assays for humans

“…However, a clinical MOCR assay also is of more general interest, and could be used for other applications such as diagnostic testing for various pathologies (summarized in Kumar et al, 2013), tracking improvements in listening strategies due to increased MOC functioning (reviewed in Guinan, 2012), and identifying those who could benefit from auditory training (summarized in Guinan, 2011). It could also be part of a test battery to select people with exceptional performance potential (e.g., Andeol et al, 2011 show that MOCR strength is correlated with localization ability at low SNRs).…”

“…Although DPOAE methods exist that can separate out the two DPOAE components (Talmadge et al, 1999;Kalluri and Shera, 2001;Long et al, 2008), the reflection-component generation is dependent on the distortion component at an unknown and uncontrolled level. This potential confound, along with other complications (see Guinan, 2006;Wagner and Heyd, 2011;Abdala et al, 2013;Kumar et al, 2013), led us to decide that DPOAEs were not our top choice for a clinical MOCR assay for humans. Although much of the animal work has been done with DPOAE adaptation paradigms, this approach is not yet suitable for human clinical use (Meinke et al, 2005;Guinan, 2006).…”