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: Neonate Auditory Brainstem Responses to CE-Chirp and CE-Chirp Octave Band Stimuli I: Versus Click and Tone Burst Stimuli. Author: Cobb KM, Stuart A. Journal: Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):710-723. PubMed ID: 27556529. Abstract: OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to generate normative auditory brainstem response (ABR) wave component peak latency and amplitude values for neonates with air- and bone-conducted CE-Chirps and air-conducted CE-Chirp octave band stimuli (i.e., 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz). A second objective was to compare neonate ABRs to CE-Chirp stimuli with ABR responses to traditional click and tone burst stimuli with the same stimulus parameters. DESIGN: Participants were 168 healthy neonates. ABRs were obtained to air- and bone-conducted CE-Chirp and click stimuli and air-conducted CE-Chirp octave band and tone burst stimuli. The effects of stimulus level, rate, and polarity were examined with air-conducted CE-Chirps and clicks. The effect of stimulus level was also examined with bone-conducted CE-Chirps and clicks and air-conducted CE-Chirp octave band stimuli. RESULTS: In general, ABR wave V amplitudes to air- and bone-conducted CE-Chirp stimuli were significantly larger (p < 0.05) than those evoked to traditional click and tone burst stimuli. Systematic statistically significant (p < 0.05) wave V latency differences existed between the air- and bone-conducted CE-Chirp and CE-Chirp octave band stimuli relative to traditional click and tone burst stimuli. CONCLUSIONS: ABRs to air- and bone-conducted CE-Chirps and CE-Chirp octave band stimuli may be valuable in the assessment of newborn infants. However, the prognostic value of such stimuli needs to be validated.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]