The first eletrocnic Journal of Otolaryngology in the world
ISSN: 1809-9777

E-ISSN: 1809-4864

 
2109 

Year: 2017  Vol. 21   Num. Suppl. 1  - Hearing & Balance 2017 - (11º)
Section:
 
Analysis of the Responses of Three Different Hearing Screening Methods
Author(s):
Brena Elisa Lucas, Yara Bagali Alcantara, Dayse Mayara Oliveira Ferreira, Ana Claudia Frizzo, Anna Caroline Silva de Oliveira
Key words:
hearing screening; otoacoustic emissions; auditory evoked potentials
Abstract:

Introduction: Individual's quality of life is directly related to the development of his abilities, in which deafness is an interference factor in this process. In this context, neonatal hearing screening is the main instrument for prior identification of hearing losses, mainly through performing of otoacoustic emissions and brainstem auditory evoked potential.

Objective: To compare responses obtained by Auditory potential in the automatic and conventional mode and through transient and distortion product emissions in healthy adults without hearing loss.

Method: Fifteen healthy subjects, aged between 18 and 30 years, with hearing thresholds within the normal range participated in the study. It was used to record of the automatic potential the Accuscreen ABR Madsen, for conventional Biologic Navigator Pro and of the Bio-logic Navigator emissions through the Scout OAE Software.

Results: Waves I, III and V was present with latency according to Normality at 80, 45 and 35 dBnHL in the conventional potential. In the automatic the pass rate was 100% in both ears. The minimum thresholds obtained by potentials showed a high relation between the measurements (Qui-Square test p = 0.00). In the emissions, was observed a 100% pass rate for distortion product speech frequencies in both ears and a high failure rate in the 4KHZ frequency in the transient.

Conclusion: The minimum threshold for hearing screening was obtained in both potentials. In the emissions there was a greater defect number in the frequency of 4KHZ in both ears for the transient when compared to the distortion product.

All right reserved. Prohibited the reproduction of papers
without previous authorization of FORL © 1997- 2024