ABSTRACT
Young adults with no history of hearing concerns were tested to investigate their /da/-evoked cortical auditory evoked potentials (P1-N1-P2) recorded from 32 scalp electrodes in the presence and absence of noise at three different loudness levels (soft, comfortable, and loud), at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio (+3 dB). P1 peak latency significantly increased at soft and loud levels, and N1 and P2 latencies increased at all three levels in the presence of noise, compared with the quiet condition. P1 amplitude was significantly larger in quiet than in noise conditions at the loudest level. N1 amplitude was larger in quiet than in noise for the soft level only. P2 amplitude was reduced in the presence of noise to a similar degree at all loudness levels. The differential effects of noise on P1, N1, and P2 suggest differences in auditory processes underlying these peaks. The combination of level and signal-to-noise ratio should be considered when using cortical auditory evoked potentials as an electrophysiological indicator of degraded speech processing.
Subject(s)
Auditory Perception/physiology , Brain/physiology , Evoked Potentials, Auditory/physiology , Noise , Speech Perception/physiology , Acoustic Stimulation , Adult , Electroencephalography , Female , Functional Laterality , Humans , Male , Speech , Time Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Cochlear implantation (CI) is a standard treatment for severe-profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). However, consensus has yet to be reached on its effectiveness for hearing loss caused by auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD). This review aims to summarize and synthesize current evidence of the effectiveness of CI in improving speech recognition in children with ANSD. DESIGN: Systematic review. STUDY SAMPLE: A total of 27 studies from an initial selection of 237. RESULTS: All selected studies were observational in design, including case studies, cohort studies, and comparisons between children with ANSD and SNHL. Most children with ANSD achieved open-set speech recognition with their CI. Speech recognition ability was found to be equivalent in CI users (who previously performed poorly with hearing aids) and hearing-aid users. Outcomes following CI generally appeared similar in children with ANSD and SNHL. Assessment of study quality, however, suggested substantial methodological concerns, particularly in relation to issues of bias and confounding, limiting the robustness of any conclusions around effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available evidence is compatible with favourable outcomes from CI in children with ANSD. However, this evidence is weak. Stronger evidence is needed to support cost-effective clinical policy and practice in this area.
