Comparative study of objective hearing thresholds in adults using Auditory Steady State Response and Auditory Brainstem Response with Pure Tone Audiometry
Journal of Otorhinolaryngology and Facial Plastic Surgery,
Vol. 9 No. 1 (2023),
2 September 2023
,
Page 1-11
https://doi.org/10.22037/orlfps.v9i1.43725
Abstract
Background: Pure-tone audiometry (PTA) is the most common audiological test to determine hearing thresholds. However, accurate assessment of hearing in difficult-to-test populations has always remained an audiological challenge as it gives inconsistent responses in PTA.
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the Auditory Steady State Response (ASSR) and Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) in determining the frequency specific hearing thresholds by establishing a correlation between the thresholds determined by subjective test- PTA and objective test - ASSR and ABR at 500 Hz, 1 kHz, 2 kHz and 4 kHz.
Methods: In this prospective study we have included 40 adult subjects (n = 80 ears) of both genders. All subjects underwent ASSR, tone burst ABR and PTA to record frequency specific hearing thresholds at 500 Hz, 1 kHz, 2 kHz and 4 kHz. Data were recorded and analyzed with SPSS IBM software version 22.
Results: Mean difference between PTA - ASSR was 14.2 dB and between PTA - ABR was 18.8 dB in the study population. We found a strong correlation between PTA-ASSR and PTA-ABR across all frequencies. We also confirmed that correlation was better in the sensorineural hearing loss and conductive hearing loss group in comparison with the normal hearing group. The overall reliability was better in high frequency for both ASSR and ABR.
Conclusion: Results of this study concluded that both ABR and ASSR can be used to predict frequency specific hearing thresholds. ASSR was more reliable than ABR for accurate prediction of frequency specific hearing threshold as the mean difference between ASSR and PTA was smaller than the mean difference between ABR and PTA.
- Pure tone audiometry, Auditory steady state response, Auditory brainstem response, Hearing Threshold
How to Cite
References
Dalzell LE, Orlando M, MacDonald M, Berg A, Bradley M, Cacace A et al. The New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: Ages of hearing loss identification, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention. Ear and Hearing. 2000 Apr;21(2):118-130.
Mason JA, Herrmann KR. Universal infant hearing screening by automated auditory brainstem response measurement. Pediatrics. 1998 Feb;101(2):221-8.
Mehl AL, Thomson V. The Colorado newborn hearing screening project, 1992-1999: on the threshold of effective population-based universal newborn hearing screening. Pediatrics. 2002 Jan;109(1):E7.
Stein LK. Factors influencing the efficacy of universal newborn hearing screening. PediatrClin North Am . 1999;46(1):95–105.
Yoshinaga-Itano C., Sedey A. L., Coulter D. K., Mehl A. L. Language of early- and later-identified children with hearing loss. Pediatrics. 1998;102:1161-1171.
Moeller MP. Early intervention and language development in children who are deaf and hard of hearing. Pediatrics. 2000;106(3):e43.
Brookhouser PE, Gorga MP, Kelly WJ. Auditory brainstem response results as predictors of behavioral auditory thresholds in severe and profound hearing impairment. Laryngoscope 1990;100:803-10.
Plourde G, Picton TW. Human auditory steady-state response during general anesthesia. AnesthAnalg1990;71:460-68.
Cohen LT, Rickards FW, Clark GM. A comparison of steady-state evoked potentials to modulated tones in awake and sleeping humans. J AcoustSoc Am 1991;90:2467-79
Gold SR, Hunsaker DH, Haseman EM. Pseudohypacusis in a military population. Ear Nose Throat J 1991;70(10):710–712.
Gleason WJ. Psychological characteristics of the audiologically inconsistent patient. Arch Otolaryngol Hand Neck Surg1958;68:42–6.
Barrs DM, Althoff LK, Krueger WW, Olsson JE. Work-related, noise-induced hearing loss: evaluation including evoked potential audiometry. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg1994;110:177–84.
Sininger YS, Abdala C. Hearing threshold as measured by auditory brain stem response in human neonates. Ear Hear 1996;17:395-401.
Valdes JL, Perez-Abalo MC, Martin V, Savio G, Sierra C, Rodriguez E, Lins O. Comparison of statistical indicators for the automatic detection of 80 Hz. auditory steady-state responses. Ear Hear.1997;18:420-9.
Lin Y.H., Ho H.C., & Wu H. P. Comparison of auditory steady-state responses and auditory brainstem responses in audiometric assessment of adults with sensorineural hearing loss. AurisNasus Larynx. 2009;36(2):140–145.
Johnson TA, Brown CJ. Threshold prediction using the auditory steady-state response and the tone burst auditory brain stem response: a within-subject comparison. Ear Hear. 2005;26(6):559-576.
Rance G, Dowell RC, Rickards FW, Beer DE, Clark GM. Steady-state evoked potential and behavioral hearing thresholds in a group of children with absent click-evoked auditory brain stem response. Ear Hearing 1998;19:48–61.
Wadhera, R., Hernot, S., Gulati, S. P., &Kalra, V. (2017). A Controlled Comparison of Auditory Steady-State Responses and Pure-Tone Audiometry in Patients with Hearing Loss. Ear, Nose & Throat Journal, 96(10–11), E47–E52.
Ozdek, Ali &Karacay, Mahmut&Saylam, Guleser& Tatar, Emel&Aygener, Nurdan&Korkmaz, Hakan. Comparison of pure tone audiometry and auditory steady-state responses in subjects with normal hearing and hearing loss. European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology (2010). 267:43-9.
D’haenens W, Dhooge I, Maes L, et al. The clinical value of the multiple-frequency 80-Hz auditory steady-state response in adults with normal hearing and hearing loss. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;135(5):496-505.
Stapells, D. R., Picton, T. W., Durieux-Smith, A., Edwards, C. G., & Moran, L. M. (1990). Thresholds for short-latency auditory evoked potentials to tones in notched noise in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Audiology, 29, 262-274
Cone-Wesson, B, Richard, C, Dowel, Dani Tomlin, Gary Rance& Wu Jia Ming. The Auditory Steady-State Response: Comparisons with the Auditory Brainstem Response. J Am AcadAudiol. 2002;13:173-187.
Aimoni C, Crema L, Savini S, Negossi L, Rosignolis M, Sacchetto L et al (2018) Hearing threshold estimation by auditory steady state responses (ASSR) in children. ActaOtolaryngol Ital 36:361–368
Van Maanen A, Stapells D (2009) Normal multiple auditory steady-state response thresholds to air-conducted stimuli in infants. J Am AcadAudiol 20(3):196–207
Vander Werff K, Brown C, Gienapp B, Schmidt Clay K (2002) Comparison of auditory steady-state response and auditory brainstem response thresholds in children. J Am AcadAudiol 13(5):227–235
Lins OG, Picton PE, Picton TW. Audiotory steady-state responses to tones amplitude-modulated at 80–110 Hz. J AcoustSoc Am 1995;97: 3051–63.
Perez-Abalo MC, Savio G, Torres A. Steady state responses to multiple amplitude-modulated tones: an optimized method to test frequency-specific thresholds in hearing-impaired children and normal-hearing subjects. Ear Hearing 2001;22:200–11
Aoyagi M, Kiren T, Furuse H, Fuse T. Pure-tone threshold prediction by 80-Hz amplitude-modulation following response. ActaOtolaryngolSuppl 1994;511:7-14
- Abstract Viewed: 258 times
- PDF Downloaded: 323 times