Optimizing Auditory Brainstem Response Test with Narrow Band Level-Specific CE-Chirps
Nilüfer Bal, Özge Gedik Toker, Hilal Hüsam, Sümeyye Özdemir, Bartlomiej Dao Lien
Abstract
Open-access reader
Nilüfer Bal, Özge Gedik Toker, Hilal Hüsam, Sümeyye Özdemir, Bartlomiej Dao Lien
Abstract
Open-access reader
Abstract Objective The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of narrow band level-specific Claus Elberling-Chirp (NB LS CE-Chirp) and LS CE-Chirp stimuli on the amplitudes, latencies, and interpeak latencies in comparison with tone burst (TB) and click. Methods A total of 40 ears (10 males, 10 females; age range: 20–26) individuals who had no complaints related to hearing participated in the study. Differences between click and LS CE-Chirp, frequency-specific (500—1,000—2,000—4,000) TB, and NB LS CE-Chirp were investigated at stimuli intensity of 70 decibel normal hearing loss (dBnHL). Results Absolute latencies were obtained longer in LS CE-Chirp than click stimulus, except wave V. At all frequencies, absolute latencies of I-III-V waves obtained with TB were significantly longer than those obtained with NB LS CE-Chirp. Amplitudes were higher in NB LS CE-Chirp compared to click and TB at all frequencies except 500 Hz. Conclusion The use of NB LS CE-Chirp is advantageous in patient assessment, but the benefit decreases at low frequencies. The differences in latency values of the stimuli should be taken into account in order to make a reliable interpretation of the results.
OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract Objective The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of narrow band level-specific Claus Elberling-Chirp (NB LS CE-Chirp) and LS CE-Chirp stimuli on the amplitudes, latencies, and interpeak latencies in comparison with tone burst (TB) and click. Methods A total of 40 ears (10 males, 10 females; age range: 20–26) individuals who had no complaints related to hearing participated in the study. Differences between click and LS CE-Chirp, frequency-specific (500—1,000—2,000—4,000) TB, and NB LS CE-Chirp were investigated at stimuli intensity of 70 decibel normal hearing loss (dBnHL). Results Absolute latencies were obtained longer in LS CE-Chirp than click stimulus, except wave V. At all frequencies, absolute latencies of I-III-V waves obtained with TB were significantly longer than those obtained with NB LS CE-Chirp. Amplitudes were higher in NB LS CE-Chirp compared to click and TB at all frequencies except 500 Hz. Conclusion The use of NB LS CE-Chirp is advantageous in patient assessment, but the benefit decreases at low frequencies. The differences in latency values of the stimuli should be taken into account in order to make a reliable interpretation of the results.
Key concepts: Chirp, Audiology, Tone burst, Stimulus (psychology), Decibel, Amplitude, Auditory brainstem response, Acoustics