Multiple-ASSR Thresholds in Infants and Young Children with Hearing Loss

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (08) ◽  
pp. 535-545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Van Maanen ◽  
David R. Stapells
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Difference Scores ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Infants And Young Children

Background: The multiple auditory steady-state response (multiple ASSR) is a promising technique for determining thresholds for infants and children. However, there are few data for infants and young children with hearing loss where multiple-ASSR thresholds have been compared to frequency-specific gold standard (i.e., behavioral or tone-evoked auditory brainstem response [tone ABR]) measures. Purpose: The study compared multiple-ASSR and tone-ABR thresholds and assessed how well “normal” ASSR levels differentiate normal from elevated thresholds. Research Design: Multiple-ASSR and tone-ABR results (to air-conduction stimuli) were obtained in infants and young children with hearing loss or normal hearing. Study Sample: 98 infants with hearing loss (53 infants provided thresholds) and 34 infants with normal hearing. Data Collection and Analysis: Multiple-ASSR and tone-ABR results were typically completed on the same day. Correlations between ASSR and ABR thresholds, linear regressions, and ASSR-minus-ABR threshold difference scores were calculated for each group (normal or hearing loss), and for both groups combined. Results: Multiple-ASSR thresholds (dB HL) were strongly correlated (r = .97) with tone-ABR thresholds (dB nHL) for 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. Mean (±1 SD) difference scores (ASSR-minus-ABR) were 10.7 ± 9.0, 9.5 ± 9.4, 9.2 ± 9.0, and 6.3 ± 9.5 dB for 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz, respectively. The previously published “normal” ASSR levels accurately differentiated normal from elevated thresholds. Out of 523 tests with elevated tone-ABR thresholds, the multiple ASSR was “normal” in only 22 tests. In these 13 infants, other ASSR frequencies were elevated, and thus the infants would not have “passed” the ASSR. Conclusions: There are few studies of infants and young children comparing ASSR thresholds to frequency-specific gold standard measures, especially using the multiple-ASSR technique. The present study, comparing multiple-ASSR to tone-ABR thresholds, nearly doubles the multiple-ASSR sample size in the literature. The results indicate that the multiple-ASSR and tone-ABR thresholds are strongly correlated, and the “normal” multiple-ASSR levels of 50, 45, 40, and 40 dB HL correctly classified children as having “normal” or “elevated” thresholds. However, due to the lack of air- and bone-conduction data in infants with different types and degrees of hearing loss, further ASSR research is needed.

Auditory Brainstem Response Wave I Prediction of Conductive Component in Infants and Young Children

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 52-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol L. Mackersie ◽  
David R. Stapells
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Prediction Methods ◽  
Aural Atresia ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Conductive Component ◽  
Conductive Hearing ◽  
Infants And Young Children

Wave I latencies were used to predict the magnitude of conductive components in 80 infants and young children (122 ears) with normal hearing, conductive hearing loss due to otitis media or aural atresia, sensorineural hearing loss, and mixed hearing loss. Two prediction methods were used. The first method based predictions on a 0.03-ms wave I latency delay for each decibel of conductive hearing loss. The second method was based on a regression analysis of wave I latency delays and the magnitude of conductive component for the subjects in this study with normal cochlear status. On average, these prediction methods resulted in prediction errors of 15 dB or greater in over one-third of the ears with hearing loss. Therefore, the clinical use of wave I latencies to predict the presence or magnitude of conductive impairment is not recommended for infants and young children. Instead, bone-conduction ABR testing is recommended as a direct measure of cochlear status when behavioral evaluation is not possible.

scholarly journals Perception–Production Links in Children's Speech

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 853-867 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna H. Lowenstein ◽  
Susan Nittrouer
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Voice Onset Time ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Spectral Measures ◽  
Signal Degradation ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Production Capacities

Purpose Child phonologists have long been interested in how tightly speech input constrains the speech production capacities of young children, and the question acquires clinical significance when children with hearing loss are considered. Children with sensorineural hearing loss often show differences in the spectral and temporal structures of their speech production, compared to children with normal hearing. The current study was designed to investigate the extent to which this problem can be explained by signal degradation. Method Ten 5-year-olds with normal hearing were recorded imitating 120 three-syllable nonwords presented in unprocessed form and as noise-vocoded signals. Target segments consisted of fricatives, stops, and vowels. Several measures were made: 2 duration measures (voice onset time and fricative length) and 4 spectral measures involving 2 segments (1st and 3rd moments of fricatives and 1st and 2nd formant frequencies for the point vowels). Results All spectral measures were affected by signal degradation, with vowel production showing the largest effects. Although a change in voice onset time was observed with vocoded signals for /d/, voicing category was not affected. Fricative duration remained constant. Conclusions Results support the hypothesis that quality of the input signal constrains the speech production capacities of young children. Consequently, it can be concluded that the production problems of children with hearing loss—including those with cochlear implants—can be explained to some extent by the degradation in the signal they hear. However, experience with both speech perception and production likely plays a role as well.

scholarly journals Comparative Study of the Auditory Steady-State Response (ASSR) and Click Auditory Brainstem Evoked Response (ABR) Thresholds among Filipino Infants and Young Children

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-12
Author(s):  
Laurence Ian C. Tan ◽  
Maria Rina T. Reyes-Quintos ◽  
Maria Leah C. Tantoco ◽  
Charlotte M. Chiong
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Steady State ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Response ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Steady State Response ◽  
State Response ◽  
Auditory Steady State Response ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Infants And Young Children

Objective: To compare the results of auditory steady-state response (ASSR) and click auditory brainstem response (click ABR) among infants and young children tested at the Ear Unit of a Tertiary General Hospital.   Methods: Design: Cross-sectional Study Setting: Tertiary General Hospital Population: Within-subject comparisons of click auditory brainstem response (click ABR) thresholds and auditory steady-state response (ASSR) thresholds among 55 infants and young children, 2 months to 35 months of age referred to the Ear Unit for electrophysiologic hearing assessment. Results: Click ABR showed strong positive correlation to all frequencies and averages of ASSR. Highest correlation was noted with the average of 1-4 kHz ASSR results with Pearson r = 0.89 (Spearman r=0.80), the average of 2-4 kHz had strong positive correlation r = 0.88 (0.79). Correlation was consistently strong through all ASSR frequencies (0.5 kHz at r=0.86 (0.74), 1 kHz at r=0.88 (0.78), 2 kHz at r=0. 87 (0.79), 4 kHz at r=0.85 (0.76)). Average differences of click ABR and ASSR thresholds were 8.2±12.9dB at 0.5 kHz, 8.6±12.6dB at 1 kHz, 5.3±11.8dB at 2 kHz and 7.8±13.4dB at 4 kHz. Among patients with no demonstrable waveforms by click ABR with maximal click stimulus, a large percentage presented with ASSR thresholds. Of these, 80.5% (33 of 41) had measurable results at 0.5 kHz with an average of 107.3±11.1dB, 85.4% (35 of 41) at 1 kHz with an average of 110.5±11.8dB, 73.2% (30 of 41) at 2 kHz with an average of 111.2±11.1dB and 63.4% (26 of 41) at 4 kHz with and average of 112.2±8.21dB. Auditory steady-state response results were comparable to auditory brainstem response results in normal to severe hearing loss, and provided additional information necessary for complete audiologic assessment especially among patients with severe to profound hearing loss wherein click ABR showed no responses. Up to 85.4% of patients that would have been noted to have no waveforms by click ABR still demonstrated measurable thresholds by ASSR   Conclusion: Our study suggests that ASSR may be the best available tool for assessing children with severe to profound hearing loss, and is a comparably effective tool in overall hearing assessment for patients requiring electrophysiological testing. The advantages of ASSR over click ABR include: 1) detection of frequency-specific thresholds and; 2) the detection of hearing loss thresholds beyond the limits of click ABR.     Key words: Auditory Steady-State Response, ASSR, Auditory Brainstem-Evoked Response, ABR, Hearing Thresholds, Electrophysiologic Testing  

scholarly journals Evaluation of Infants and Young Children with Hearing Loss Not Diagnosed in Its Early Stages

1985 ◽  
Vol 78 (6special) ◽  
pp. 1235-1246
Author(s):  
Yoshiko Yamamoto ◽  
Kishiko Sugiyama ◽  
Hiromichi Ishigami ◽  
Isao Takimoto
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Early Stages ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Infants And Young Children
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document