These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Further comparisons of ABR response amplitudes, test time, and estimation of hearing threshold using frequency-specific chirp and tone pip stimuli in newborns: Findings at 0.5 and 2 kHz.
    Author: Ferm I, Lightfoot G.
    Journal: Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(10):745-50. PubMed ID: 26121565.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare auditory brainstem response (ABR) amplitudes evoked by 0.5 and 2 kHz tone pip and narrowband chirp (NB CE-Chirp) stimuli when testing post-screening newborns. To determine the difference in 'estimated hearing level' correction values. DESIGN: Tests were performed with tone pips and NB CE-Chirps at 0.5 or 2 kHz and the ABR threshold for each stimulus defined. Response amplitude, response quality (Fmp), and residual noise were compared for both stimuli. STUDY SAMPLE: Thirty-nine babies (42 ears) who passed our ABR discharge criterion at 4 kHz following referral from their newborn hearing screen. RESULTS: NB CE-Chirp responses were, on average, 31% larger than the tone pip responses at 0.5 kHz and were 52% larger at 2 kHz. Fmp was significantly higher for NB CE-Chirps. CONCLUSIONS: The advantages of NB CE-Chirps over tone pips we previously identified at 4 and 1 kHz extends to 0.5 and 2 kHz, which supports the use of NB CE-Chirps when testing newborns. We propose that ABR nHL threshold to eHL corrections for NB CE-Chirps should be approximately 5 dB less than corrections for tone pips at 0.5 and 2 kHz, mirroring our recommendation at 4 and 1 kHz.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]