OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to compare the magnitude of gender difference in speech-evoked auditory brainstem response results between monaural and binaural stimulations.
METHODS: A total of 34 healthy Asian adults aged 19-30 years participated in this comparative study. Eighteen of them were females (mean age=23.6±2.3 years) and the remaining sixteen were males (mean age=22.0±2.3 years). For each subject, speech-evoked auditory brainstem response was recorded with the synthesized syllable /da/ presented monaurally and binaurally.
RESULTS: While latencies were not affected (p>0.05), the binaural stimulation produced statistically higher speech-evoked auditory brainstem response amplitudes than the monaural stimulation (p<0.05). As revealed by large effect sizes (d>0.80), substantive gender differences were noted in most of speech-evoked auditory brainstem response peaks for both stimulation modes.
CONCLUSION: The magnitude of gender difference between the two stimulation modes revealed some distinct patterns. Based on these clinically significant results, gender-specific normative data are highly recommended when using speech-evoked auditory brainstem response for clinical and future applications. The preliminary normative data provided in the present study can serve as the reference for future studies on this test among Asian adults.
METHODS: Twenty-nine healthy Malaysian subjects (14 males and 15 females) aged 19 to 30 years participated in this study. After measuring the head circumference, speech-ABR was recorded by using synthesized syllable /da/ from the right ear of each participant. Speech-ABR peaks amplitudes, peaks latencies, and composite onset measures were computed and analyzed.
RESULTS: Significant gender disparities were noted in the transient component but not in the sustained component of speech-ABR. Statistically higher V/A amplitudes and less steeper V/A slopes were found in females. These gender differences were partially affected after controlling for the head size.
CONCLUSIONS: Head size is not the main contributing factor for gender disparities in speech-ABR outcomes. Gender-specific normative data can be useful when recording speech-ABR for clinical purposes.
METHODS: Seventeen healthy children (6 boys, 11 girls) aged from 5 to 9 years (mean = 6.8 ± 3.3 years) were tested in two sessions separated by a 3-month period. The stimulus used was a 40-ms syllable /da/ presented at 30 dB sensation level.
RESULTS: As revealed by pair t-test and intra-class correlation (ICC) analyses, peak latencies, peak amplitudes and composite onset measures of speech-ABR were found to be highly replicable. Compared to other parameters, higher ICC values were noted for peak latencies of speech-ABR.
CONCLUSION: The present study was the first to report the test-retest reliability of speech-ABR recorded at low stimulation levels in healthy children. Due to its good stability, it can be used as an objective indicator for assessing the effectiveness of auditory rehabilitation in hearing-impaired children in future studies.
METHODS: The prospective clinical study was conducted at Selayang Hospital (SH) and Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz (HCTM) within one year. A total of 38 children ranging from 3 to 18 years old underwent hearing evaluation using ABR tests and MSSR under sedation. The duration of both tests were then compared.
RESULTS: The estimated hearing threshold of frequency specific chirp MSSR showed good correlation with ABR especially in higher frequencies such as 2000 Hz and 4000Hz with the value of cronbach alpha of 0.890, 0.933, 0.970 and 0.969 on 500Hz, 1000Hz, 2000Hz and 4000Hz. The sensitivity of MSSR is 0.786, 0.75, 0.957 and 0.889 and specificity is 0.85, 0.882, 0.979 and 0.966 over 500Hz, 1000Hz, 2000Hz and 4000Hz. The duration of MSSR tests were shorter than ABR tests in normal hearing children with an average of 35.3 minutes for MSSR tests and 46.4 minutes for ABR tests. This can also be seen in children with hearing loss where the average duration for MSSR tests is 40.0 minutes and 52.0 minutes for ABR tests.
CONCLUSION: MSSR showed good correlation and reliability in comparison with ABR especially on higher frequencies. Hence, MSSR is a good clinical test to diagnose children with hearing loss.
Method: Quasi-experimental and repeated-measures study designs were used in this study. Twenty-six adults with normal hearing (17 females, 9 males) participated. ABRs were acquired from the study participants at 3 intensity levels (80, 60, and 40 dB nHL), 3 frequencies (500, 1000, and 2000 Hz), 2 electrode montages (ipsilateral and vertical), and 2 stimuli (NB LS CE-Chirp and tone-burst) using 2 stopping criteria (fixed averages at 4,000 sweeps and F test at multiple points = 3.1).
Results: Wave V amplitudes were only 19%-26% larger for the vertical recordings than the ipsilateral recordings in both the ABRs obtained from the NB LS CE-Chirp and tone-burst stimuli. The mean differences in the F test at multiple points values and the residual noise levels between the ABRs obtained from the vertical and ipsilateral montages were statistically not significant. In addition, the ABR elicited from the NB LS CE-Chirp was significantly larger (up to 69%) than those from the tone-burst, except at the lower intensity level.
Conclusion: Both the ipsilateral and vertical montages can be used to record ABR to the NB LS CE-Chirp because of the small enhancement in the wave V amplitude provided by the vertical montage.