Adaptation of distortion product otoacoustic emission in humans.

Previous studies of animals observed a phenomenon of adaptation of distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and found that the phenomenon was mediated to a large extent by the medial olivocochlear (MOC) reflex. The present study investigated DPOAE adaptation in humans. The following stimuli were used: f2/f1 = 1.2; f2 = 2, 4, or 5.65 kHz; L2 = 50-65 dB SPL re 20 microPa rms, L1 - L2 = 0-15 dB, where L1 and L2 represent levels of the f1 and f2 tones, respectively; duration of two-tone burst = 5.5 s; interburst gap = 20 or 30 s; number of repetitions = 40 or 64. We analyzed the 2f1 - f2 DPOAE as a function of time using a method of heterodyne envelope detection. The subjects were 20 humans aged from 15 to 54 years (median = 21 years) with normal hearing. We observed that (1) humans exhibited DPOAE adaptation phenomenon; (2) the time course of DPOAE level was characterized by a 2-exponential function; (3) distributions of the fast and slow time constants were well separated with their median values being 69 ms and 1.51 s, respectively; (4) distributions of the magnitudes of the fast and slow adaptation components were largely overlapped with their median values being 0.65 and 0.40 dB, respectively; and (5) the combined magnitude of the adaptation ranged from 0.4 to 3.0 dB with a median of 1.10 dB. To our knowledge, the present study is the first published article to describe adaptation of DPOAE in humans. These results should help advance the basic knowledge of human cochlear mechanics operating under the control of the MOC feedback system and contribute to the development of practical applications such as identifying people at high risk of acoustical injury and a clinical test of the functional status of the MOC system.

Sources of distortion product otoacoustic emissions revealed by suppression experiments and inverse fast Fourier transforms in normal ears.

Primary and secondary sources combine to produce the 2f1-f2 distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measured in the ear canals of humans. DPOAEs were obtained in nine normal-hearing subjects using a fixed-f2 paradigm in which f1 was varied. The f2 was 2 or 4 kHz, and absolute and relative primary levels were varied. Data were obtained with and without a third tone (f3) placed 15.6 Hz below 2f1-f2. The level of f3 was varied in order to suppress the stimulus frequency otoacoustic emission (SFOAE) coming from the 2f1-f2 place. These data were converted from the complex frequency domain into an equivalent time representation using an inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT). IFFTs of unsuppressed DPOAE data were characterized by two or more peaks. Relative amplitudes of these peaks depended on overall primary level and on primary-level differences. The suppressor eliminated later peaks, but early peaks remained relatively unaltered. Results are interpreted to mean that the DPOAE measured in humans includes components from the f2 place (intermodulation distortion) and DP place (in the form of a SFOAE). These findings build on previous work by providing evidence that multiple peaks in the IFFT are due to a secondary source at the DP place.

Distortion product otoacoustic emission input/output functions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired human ears.

DPOAE input/output (I/O) functions were measured at 7f2 frequencies (1 to 8 kHz; f2/f1 = 1.22) over a range of levels (-5 to 95 dB SPL) in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired human ears. L1-L2 was level dependent in order to produce the largest 2f1-f2 responses in normal ears. System distortion was determined by collecting DP data in six different acoustic cavities. These data were used to derive a multiple linear regression model to predict system distortion levels. The model was tested on cochlear-implant users and used to estimate system distortion in all other ears. At most but not all f2's, measurements in cochlear implant ears were consistent with model predictions. At all f2 frequencies, the ears with normal auditory thresholds produced I/O functions characterized by compressive nonlinear regions at moderate levels, with more rapid growth at low and high stimulus levels. As auditory threshold increased, DPOAE threshold increased, accompanied by DPOAE amplitude reductions, notably over the range of levels where normal ears showed compression. The slope of the I/O function was steeper in impaired ears. The data from normal-hearing ears resembled direct measurements of basilar membrane displacement in lower animals. Data from ears with hearing loss showed that the compressive region was affected by cochlear damage; however, responses at high levels of stimulation resembled those observed in normal ears.

Distortion product otoacoustic emission test performance when both 2f1-f2 and 2f2-f1 are used to predict auditory status.

The objective of this study was to determine whether distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) test performance, defined as its ability to distinguish normal-hearing ears from those with hearing loss, can be improved by examining response and noise amplitudes at 2 f1-f2 and 2f2-f1 simultaneously. In addition, there was interest in knowing whether measurements at both DPs and for several primary frequency pairs can be used in a multivariate analysis to further optimize test performance. DPOAE and noise amplitudes were measured at 2f1-f2 and 2 f2-f1 for 12 primary levels (L2 from 10 to 65 dB SPL in 5-dB steps) and 9 pairs of primary frequencies (0.5 to 8 kHz in 1/2-octave steps). All data were collected in a sound-treated room from 70 subjects with normal hearing and 80 subjects with hearing loss. Subjects had normal middle-ear function at the time of the DPOAE test, based on standard tympanometric measurements. Measurement-based stopping rules were used such that the test terminated when the noise floor around the 2 f1-f2 DP was < or = -30 dB SPL or after 32 s of artifact-free averaging, whichever occurred first. Data were analyzed using clinical decision theory in which relative operating characteristics (ROC) curves were constructed and areas under the ROC curves were estimated. In addition, test performance was assessed by selecting the criterion value that resulted in a sensitivity of 90% and determining the specificity at that criterion value. Data were analyzed using traditional univariate comparisons, in which predictions about auditory status were based only on data obtained when f2 = audiometric frequency. In addition, multivariate analysis techniques were used to determine whether test performance can be optimized by using many variables to predict auditory status. As expected, DPOAEs were larger for 2f1-f2 compared to 2 f2-f1 in subjects with normal hearing. However, noise amplitudes were smaller for 2f2-f1, but this effect was restricted to the lowest f2 frequencies. A comparison of signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) within normal-hearing ears showed that the 2f1-f2 DP was more frequently characterized by larger SNRs compared to 2f2-f1. However, there were several subjects in whom 2f2-f1 produced a larger SNR. ROC curve areas and specificities for a fixed sensitivity increased only slightly when data from both DPs were used to predict auditory status. Multivariate analyses, in which the inputs included both DPs for several primary frequency pairs surrounding each audiometric frequency, produced the highest areas and specificities. Thus, DPOAE test performance was improved slightly by examining data at two DP frequencies simultaneously. This improvement was achieved at no additional cost in terms of test time. When measurements at both DPs were combined with data obtained for several primary frequency pairs and then analyzed in a multivariate context, the best test performance was achieved. Excellent test performance (ROC) curve areas >0.95% and specificities >92% at all frequencies, including 500 Hz, were achieved for these conditions. Although the results described should be validated on an independent set of data, they suggest that the accuracy with which DPOAE measurements identify auditory status can be improved with multivariate analyses and measurements at multiple DPs.

Distortion product otoacoustic emission test performance for a priori criteria and for multifrequency audiometric standards.

OBJECTIVES: 1) To describe distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) test performance when a priori response criteria are applied to a large set of DPOAE data. 2) To describe DPOAE test performance when multifrequency definitions of auditory function are used. 3) To determine DPOAE test performance when a single decision regarding auditory status is made for an ear, based on DPOAE data from several frequencies. 4) To compare univariate and multivariate test performance when multifrequency gold standard definitions and response criteria are applied to DPOAE data. DESIGN: DPOAE and audiometric data were analyzed from 1267 ears of 806 subjects. These data were evaluated for three different frequency combinations (2, 3, 4 kHz; 2, 3, 4, 6 kHz; 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6 kHz). DPOAE data were collected for each of the f2 frequencies listed above, using primary levels (L1/L2) of 65/55 dB SPL and a primary ratio (f2/f1) of 1.22. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated for signal to noise ratios (SNRs) of 3, 6, and 9 dB, which are in common clinical use. In addition, test performance was evaluated using clinical decision theory, following the convention we have used in previous reports on otoacoustic emission test performance. Both univariate and multivariate analyses techniques were applied to the data. In addition to evaluating DPOAE test performance for the case when audiometric and f2 frequency were equal, multifrequency gold standards and multifrequency criterion responses were evaluated. Three new gold standards were used to assess test performance: average pure-tone thresholds, extrema thresholds that took into account both the magnitude of the loss and the number of frequencies at which hearing loss existed, and a combination of the two. These new gold standards were applied to each of the three frequency groups described above. RESULTS: As expected, SNR criteria of 3, 6, and 9 dB never resulted in perfect DPOAE test performance. Even the most stringent of these criteria (9 dB SNR) did not result in a sensitivity of 100%. This result suggests that caution should be exercised in the interpretation of DPOAE test results when these a priori criteria are used clinically. Excellent test performance was achieved when auditory status was classified on the basis of the new gold standards and when either SNR or the output of multivariate logistic regressions (LRs) were used as criterion measures. Invariably, the LR resulted in superior test performance compared with what was achieved by the SNR. For SNR criteria of 3, 6, and 9 dB and (by definition) for the LR, specificity, in general, exceeded 80% and often was greater than 90%. Sensitivity, however, depended on the magnitude of hearing loss. Diagnostic errors, when they occurred, were more common for patients with mild hearing losses (21 to 40 dB HL); sensitivity approached 100% once the hearing loss exceeded 40 dB HL. The largest differences between test performance based on SNR or LR occurred for the ears with mild hearing loss, where the LR resulted in more accurate diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: It should not be assumed that the use of a priori response criteria, such as SNRs of 3, 6, or 9 dB, will identify all ears with hearing loss. Test performance when multifrequency gold standards are used to define an ear as normal or impaired and when data from multiple f2 frequencies are used to make a diagnosis, resulted in excellent test performance, especially when the LR was used. When predicting auditory status with multifrequency gold standards, the LR resulted in relative operating characteristic curve areas of 0.95 or 0.96. An output from the LR can be selected that results in a specificity of 90% or better. When the loss exceeded 40 dB HL, the same output from the LR resulted in test sensitivity of nearly 100%. These were the best test results that were achieved. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Predicting audiometric status from distortion product otoacoustic emissions using multivariate analyses.

OBJECTIVES: 1) To determine whether multivariate statistical approaches improve the classification of normal and impaired ears based on distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements, in comparison with the results obtained with more traditional single-variable applications of clinical decision theory. 2) To determine how well the multivariate predictors, derived from analysis on a training group, generalized to a validation group. 3) To provide a way to apply the multivariate approaches clinically. DESIGN: Areas under the relative operating characteristic (ROC) curve and cumulative distributions derived from DPOAE, DPOAE/Noise, discriminant function (DF) scores and logit function (LF) scores were used to compare univariate and multivariate predictors of audiometric status. DPOAE and Noise amplitudes for 8 f2 frequencies were input to a discriminant analysis and to a logistic regression. These analyses generated a DF and LF, respectively, composed of a linear combination of selected variables. The DF and LF scores were the input variables to the decision theory analyses. For comparison purposes, DPOAE test performance was also evaluated using only one variable (DPOAE or DPOAE/Noise when f2 = audiometric frequency). Analyses were based on data from over 1200 ears of 806 subjects, ranging in age from 1.3 to 96 yr, with thresholds ranging from -5 to >120 dB HL. For statistical purposes, normal hearing was defined as thresholds of 20 dB HL or better. For the multivariate analyses, the database was randomly divided into two groups of equal size. One group served as the "training" set, which was used to generate the DFs and LFs. The other group served as a "validation" set to determine the robustness of the DF and LF solutions. RESULTS: For all test frequencies, multivariate analyses yielded greater areas under the ROC curve than univariate analyses, and greater specificities at fixed sensitivities. Within the multivariate techniques, discriminant analysis and logistic regression yielded similar results and both yielded robust solutions that generalized well to the validation groups. The improvement in test performance with multivariate analyses was greatest for conditions in which the single predictor variable resulted in the poorest performance. CONCLUSIONS: A more accurate determination of auditory status at a specific frequency can be obtained by combining multiple predictor variables. Although the DF and LF multivariate approaches resulted in the greatest separation between normal and impaired distributions, overlap still exists, which suggests that there would be value in continued efforts to improve DPOAE test performance.

On the existence of an age/threshold/frequency interaction in distortion product otoacoustic emissions.

Interactions among age, threshold, and frequency in relation to distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) have yet to be resolved. The effects of these variables were explored by analyzing DPOAEs in ears with thresholds not exceeding 20 dB HL. Multivariate regression analyses were performed in two different ways. For data to be included in the first analysis, audiometric threshold had to be 20 dB HL or better only at the particular frequency under study, but might exceed 20 dB HL at other half-octave frequencies. Significant main effects were found for age, threshold, and frequency. There was also an age-by-frequency interaction, but a significant age-by-threshold interaction was not observed. DPOAE amplitudes decreased as either age, frequency, or threshold increased. In the second analysis, when a more stringent inclusion criterion was applied (normal thresholds at all frequencies), the main effects for age, threshold, and frequency were not significant. The significant age-by-frequency interaction remained, whereby DPOAE amplitudes decreased as age and frequency increased, but the age-by-threshold interaction again was not significant. The magnitude of DPOAE amplitude change across age, threshold, and frequency and for the age-by-frequency interaction was small but similar for both groups of subjects. Age in association with threshold did not account for observed changes in DPOAE amplitudes for either group. Importantly, the lack of a significant age-by-threshold interaction indicates that there may be processes intrinsic to aging alone that act on DPOAE generation.