Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol ; 135: 110071, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32497908

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: There has been an increase in the use of the CE-Chirp stimulus in automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) equipment for neonatal hearing screening. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the LS CE-Chirp-evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR) compared to the click-evoked ABR for the identification of different degrees and configurations of sensorineural (SNHL) hearing loss. METHOD: 49 ears with mild to moderate SNHL were assessed: 16 ears with rising SNHL and 33 ears with sloping high frequency SNHL. Behavioural pure tone thresholds were obtained at 125-8000 Hz and ABR thresholds were measured using the click and LS CE-Chirp stimuli respectively. Click- and LS CE-Chirp-evoked thresholds were compared with each other and with behavioural pure tone average at 500, 1000, 2000 Hz (PTA), high frequency average at 2000, 4000, 8000 Hz (HFA) and low frequency average at 250, 500, 1000 Hz (LFA). Diagnostic accuracy of the two ABR stimuli was also compared by using ROC curves. RESULTS: Differences between click- and LS CE Chirp-evoked ABR, and behavioural thresholds were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The highest significant correlations for ABR using clicks to behavioural thresholds was found at 2000 and 4000 Hz, whereas, the highest correlation for LS CE-Chirp ABRs to behavioural thresholds was found at 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz (r > 0.7, p < 0.001). A very strong, positive correlation was found between both click (r = 0.805, p < 0.001) and LS CE-Chirp (r = 0.825, p < 0.001) and the behavioural PTA. LS CE-Chirp ABR thresholds were closer to mid and low frequency thresholds than the click ABR while the click-evoked thresholds were in closer proximity to HFA. Sensitivity and specificity and false negative rates were identical. Diagnostic accuracy of the LS CE-Chirp ABR was equal to or better than click for low (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.83), mid (AUC = 0.89) and high frequency hearing losses (AUC = 0.73). However, scatterplots indicated more frequent underestimation of behavioural pure tone thresholds at mid and high frequencies with the LS CE-Chirp than for the click ABR. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of the LS CE Chirp-evoked ABR is equivalent or better than the click-evoked ABR. The importance of ongoing surveillance and consideration of ABR screening protocols is consequently emphasized.


Subject(s)
Acoustic Stimulation/methods , Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/diagnosis , Hearing Tests/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Area Under Curve , Auditory Threshold , Female , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , ROC Curve , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
2.
Auris Nasus Larynx ; 47(3): 367-376, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31862282

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Even though there is an association between hearing loss and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), particularly in low- and middle-income countries, further research is needed to investigate the nature of such hearing loss. Likewise, despite documented vestibular alterations in people with HIV, the true occurrence, presentation, and nature of these manifestations are yet to be established. Advances in technology for vestibular testing has allowed for objective site-of-lesion tests such as the video head impulse test (vHIT), cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMPs) and ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (oVEMPs). The current study aimed to compare and describe auditory, vHIT, cVEMPs and oVEMPs findings in adults with and without HIV. METHODS: The current study included an HIV positive group (n = 30) and an HIV negative group (n = 30) who underwent an auditory assessment (tympanometry and pure tone audiometry) and objective vestibular assessments. RESULTS: The occurrence of hearing loss was 53.3% in the HIV positive group compared to 33.3% in the HIV negative group. A higher occurrence of vestibular involvement was documented in the HIV positive group (73.3%) compared to 13.3% in the HIV negative group. CONCLUSION: Auditory assessment and objective measures of vestibular end-organ function (vHIT and VEMPs) can be useful to detect sub-clinical alterations. The equipment is mobile and can be performed in any health care setting such as infectious disease clinics for surveillance and monitoring purposes.


Subject(s)
HIV Infections/physiopathology , Head Impulse Test , Hearing Loss/etiology , Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials , Adult , Audiometry, Pure-Tone , CD4 Lymphocyte Count , Case-Control Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , HIV Infections/complications , HIV Seronegativity/physiology , HIV Seropositivity/complications , HIV Seropositivity/physiopathology , Hearing Loss/diagnosis , Hearing Loss/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Vestibule, Labyrinth/physiology , Viral Load , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...