Otoacoustic emissions from normal‐hearing and hearing‐impaired subjects: Distortion product responses

1993 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 2050-2060 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Gorga ◽  
Stephen T. Neely ◽  
Brenda Bergman ◽  
Kathryn L. Beauchaine ◽  
Jan R. Kaminski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Distortion Product

scholarly journals Predicting hearing loss from otoacoustic emissions using an artificial neural network

2002 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rouviere De Waal ◽  
René Hugo ◽  
Maggi Soer ◽  
Johann J. Krüger
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Artificial Neural Network ◽  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Back Propagation ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Distortion Product ◽  
Hearing Ability ◽  
Artificial Neural ◽  
Artificial Neural Network Ann

Normal and impaired pure tone thresholds (PTTs) were predicted from distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DP using a feed-forward artificial neural network (ANN) with a back-propagation training algorithm. The ANN used a present and absent DPOAEs from eight DP grams, (2fl -f2 = 406 - 4031 Hz) to predict PTTs at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz. With normal hearing as < 25 dB HL, prediction accuracy of normal hearing was 94% at 500, 88% at 1000, 88% at 2000 and 93% at 4000 Hz. Prediction of hearing-impaired categories was less accurate, due to insufficient data for the ANN to train on. This research indicates the possibility of accurately predicting hearing ability within 10 dB in normal hearing individuals and in hearing-impaired listeners with DPOAEs and ANNsfrom 500 - 4000 Hz.

Detection of Hearing Loss Using 2f2-f1 and 2f1-f2 Distortion-Product Otoacoustic Emissions

2005 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 1165-1186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracy S. Fitzgerald ◽  
Beth A. Prieve
Keyword(s):  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Primary Level ◽  
Distortion Product ◽  
Hearing Status ◽  
Stimulus Parameters

Although many distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) may be measured in the ear canal in response to 2 pure tone stimuli, the majority of clinical studies have focused exclusively on the DPOAE at the frequency 2f1-f2. This study investigated another DPOAE, 2f2-f1, in an attempt to determine the following: (a) the optimal stimulus parameters for its clinical measurement and (b) its utility in differentiating between normal-hearing and hearing-impaired ears at low-to-mid frequencies (≤2000 Hz) when measured either alone or in conjunction with the 2f1-f2 DPOAE. Two experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, the effects of primary level, level separation, and frequency separation (f2/f1) on 2f2-f1 DPOAE level were evaluated in normal-hearing ears for low-to-mid f2 frequencies (700–2000 Hz). Moderately high-level primaries (60–70 dB SPL) presented at equal levels or with f2 slightly higher than f1 produced the highest 2f2-f1 DPOAE levels. When the f2/f1 ratio that produced the highest 2f2-f1 DPOAE levels was examined across participants, the mean optimal f2/f1 ratio across f2 frequencies and primary level separations was 1.08. In Experiment 2, the accuracy with which DPOAE level or signal-to-noise ratio identified hearing status at the f2 frequency as normal or impaired was evaluated using clinical decision analysis. The 2f2-f1 and 2f1-f2 DPOAEs were measured from both normal-hearing and hearing-impaired ears using 2 sets of stimulus parameters: (a) the traditional parameters for measuring the 2f1-f2 DPOAE (f2/f1 = 1.22; L1, L2 = 65, 55 dB SPL) and (b) the new parameters that were deemed optimal for the 2f2-f1 DPOAE in Experiment 1 (f2/f1 = 1.073, L1 and L2 = 65 dB SPL). Identification of hearing status using 2f2-f1 DPOAE level and signal-to-noise ratio was more accurate when the new stimulus parameters were used compared with the results achieved when the 2f2-f1 DPOAE was recorded using the traditional parameters. However, identification of hearing status was less accurate for the 2f2-f1 DPOAE measured using the new parameters than for the 2f1-f2 DPOAE measured using the traditional parameters. No statistically significant improvements in test performance were achieved when the information from the 2 DPOAEs was combined, either by summing the DPOAE levels or by using logistic regression analysis.

A comparison of transient‐evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions in normal‐hearing and hearing‐impaired subjects

1993 ◽  
Vol 94 (5) ◽  
pp. 2639-2648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Gorga ◽  
Stephen T. Neely ◽  
Brenda M. Bergman ◽  
Kathryn L. Beauchaine ◽  
Jan R. Kaminski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Distortion Product

Evaluation of Efferent Auditory System and Hearing Quality in Parkinson's Disease: Is the Difficulty in Speech Understanding in Complex Listening Conditions Related to Neural Degeneration or Aging?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Nuriye Yıldırım Gökay ◽  
Bülent Gündüz ◽  
Fatih Söke ◽  
Recep Karamert
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Auditory System ◽  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Auditory Pathway ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
System Function ◽  
Distortion Product

Purpose The effects of neurological diseases on the auditory system have been a notable issue for investigators because the auditory pathway is closely associated with neural systems. The purposes of this study are to evaluate the efferent auditory system function and hearing quality in Parkinson's disease (PD) and to compare the findings with age-matched individuals without PD to present a perspective on aging. Method The study included 35 individuals with PD (mean age of 48.50 ± 8.00 years) and 35 normal-hearing peers (mean age of 49 ± 10 years). The following tests were administered for all participants: the first section of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale; pure-tone audiometry, speech audiometry, tympanometry, and acoustic reflexes; and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) and contralateral suppression of DPOAEs. SPSS Version 25 was used for statistical analyses, and values of p < .05 were considered statistically significant. Results There were no statistically significant differences in the pure-tone audiometry thresholds and DPOAE responses between the individuals with PD and their normal-hearing peers ( p = .732). However, statistically significant differences were found between the groups in suppression levels of DPOAEs and hearing quality ( p < .05). In addition, a statistically significant and positive correlation was found between the amount of suppression at some frequencies and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale scores. Conclusions This study indicates that medial olivocochlear efferent system function and the hearing quality of individuals with PD were affected adversely due to the results of PD pathophysiology on the hearing system. For optimal intervention and follow-up, tasks related to hearing quality in daily life can also be added to therapies for PD.

Early Evidence of Cochlear Damage in a Large Sample of Percussionists

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 135-139
Author(s):  
Jodee A Pride ◽  
David R Cunningham
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hair Cell ◽  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Outer Hair Cell ◽  
Cell Damage ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Outer Hair Cells ◽  
Sensory Loss ◽  
Distortion Product ◽  
Hair Cell Damage

Percussionists can be exposed to intermittent sound stimuli that exceed 145 dB SPL, although damage may occur to the outer hair cells at levels of 120 dB SPL. The present study measured distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) in a group of 86 normal-hearing percussionists and 39 normal-hearing nonpercussionists. Results indicate that normal-hearing percussionists have lower DPOAE amplitudes than normal-hearing nonpercussionists. DPOAE amplitudes were significantly lower at 6000 Hz in both the left and right ears for percussionists. Percussionists also more frequently had absent DPOAEs, with the greatest differences occurring at 6000 Hz (absent DPOAEs in 25% of percussionists vs 10% of nonpercussionists). When all frequencies are considered as a group, 33% of the percussionists had an absent DPOAE in either ear at some frequency, compared to only 23% of the nonpercussionists. Otoacoustic emissions are more sensitive to outer hair cell damage than pure-tone threshold measurements and can serve as an important measurement of sensory loss (i.e., outer hair cell damage) in musicians before the person perceives the hearing loss. DPOAE monitoring for musicians, along with appropriate education and intervention, might help prevent or minimize music-induced hearing loss.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document