Abstract

Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) are currently used as a valuable audiological test or as a hearing screening tool. There are many commercially available OAE recording systems that are used both for clinical practice and for research. However, there is little information in the literature comparing their performance in detecting hearing loss. The purpose of this prospective, nonrandomized, and controlled study was to evaluate the screening performance obtained from recent and older versions of the Otometrics Accuscreen OAE screening device in comparison with the Otodynamics ILO-292 OAE system, which has been used as the gold standard. Testing included otoscopic assessment, pure tone audiometry, tympanometry, and transiently evoked OAE (TEOAE) recordings. There was about a 77% agreement between the two versions of the Accuscreen device. Agreement between the two Accuscreen devices and the ILO was approximately 70% for the old and 80% for the new. The newer version of Accuscreen seems to perform better than the old, being more consistent with the reference ILO system and with the audiometry profiles of the tested subjects. In order to set robust standards for OAE evaluation and analysis, additional studies comparing different OAE hearing screening systems are needed.

Highlights

  • Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) are low-level sounds generated in the cochlea [1].Their most common application is in the area of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) programs [2,3]

  • The present study focuses on transiently evoked OAEs (TEOAEs), which are evoked by a click or a chirp [6,7,8]

  • This study shows there is an overlooked problem regarding OAE recording systems

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) are low-level sounds generated in the cochlea [1] Their most common application is in the area of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) programs [2,3]. Commercial OAE equipment can be divided into two classes: clinical systems and screening devices. In a hearing screening context, a high-quality OAE response is not so important as a quick reading that indicates whether an OAE signal is present or not. For this reason, screening protocols use shorter recording windows (usually 10 ms, compared to the 20 ms used in a standard clinical system), which result in shorter acquisition times and faster responses. Screening OAE devices were initially developed for UNHS programs, they are used to assess the hearing status of children and adults [9]

Objectives
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.