Download PDF
Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 20(02): 099-104
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1566133
Original Research
Thieme Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Auditory Evoked Potentials with Different Speech Stimuli: a Comparison and Standardization of Values

Dayane Domeneghini Didoné
1   Department of Phonoaudiology, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil
,
Sheila Jacques Oppitz
1   Department of Phonoaudiology, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil
,
Jordana Folgearini
1   Department of Phonoaudiology, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil
,
Eliara Pinto Vieira Biaggio
1   Department of Phonoaudiology, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil
,
Michele Vargas Garcia
1   Department of Phonoaudiology, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

11 May 2015

26 July 2015

Publication Date:
15 February 2016 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potentials (LLAEP) with speech sounds has been the subject of research, as these stimuli would be ideal to check individualś detection and discrimination.

Objective The objective of this study is to compare and describe the values of latency and amplitude of cortical potentials for speech stimuli in adults with normal hearing.

Methods The sample population included 30 normal hearing individuals aged between 18 and 32 years old with ontological disease and auditory processing. All participants underwent LLAEP search using pairs of speech stimuli (/ba/ x /ga/, /ba/ x /da/, and /ba/ x /di/. The authors studied the LLAEP using binaural stimuli at an intensity of 75dBNPS. In total, they used 300 stimuli were used (∼60 rare and 240 frequent) to obtain the LLAEP. Individuals received guidance to count the rare stimuli. The authors analyzed latencies of potential P1, N1, P2, N2, and P300, as well as the ampleness of P300.

Results The mean age of the group was approximately 23 years. The averages of cortical potentials vary according to different speech stimuli. The N2 latency was greater for /ba/ x /di/ and P300 latency was greater for /ba/ x /ga/. Considering the overall average amplitude, it ranged from 5.35 and 7.35uV for different speech stimuli.

Conclusion It was possible to obtain the values of latency and amplitude for different speech stimuli. Furthermore, the N2 component showed higher latency with the / ba / x / di / stimulus and P300 for /ba/ x / ga /.

Keywords

evoked potentials - auditory - speech perception - electrophysiology
 

  • References

  • 1 Kraus N, Nicol T. Aggregate neural responses to speech sounds in the central auditory system. Speech Commun 2003; 41: 35-47
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Korczak PA, Kurtzberg D, Stapells DR. Effects of sensorineural hearing loss and personal hearing AIDS on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing. Ear Hear 2005; 26 (2) 165-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Soares AJC, Sanches SGG, Neves-Lobo IF, Carvalho RMM, Matas CG, Cárnio MS. Potenciais evocados auditivos de longa latência e processamento auditivo central em crianças com alterações de leitura e escrita: dados preliminares. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2011; 15 (4) 486-491
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Banai K, Hornickel J, Skoe E, Nicol T, Zecker S, Kraus N. Reading and subcortical auditory function. Cereb Cortex 2009; 19 (11) 2699-2707
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Skoe E, Kraus N. Auditory brain stem response to complex sounds: a tutorial. Ear Hear 2010; 31 (3) 302-324
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Malayeri S, Lotfi Y, Moossavi SA, Rostami R, Faghihzadeh S. Brainstem response to speech and non-speech stimuli in children with learning problems. Hear Res 2014; 313: 75-82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sharma A, Nash AA, Dorman M. Cortical development, plasticity and re-organization in children with cochlear implants. J Commun Disord 2009; 42 (4) 272-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Alvarenga KF, Amorim RB, Agostinho-Pesse RS, Costa OA, Nascimento LT, Bevilacqua MC. Speech perception and cortical auditory evoked potentials in cochlear implant users with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorders. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2012; 76 (9) 1332-1338
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mcpherson DL. Late potentials of auditory system (evoked potentials). San Diego: Singular Publishing Group; 1996
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Kraus N, Mc Gee T. Potenciais auditivos evocados de longa latência. In: Katz J, editor. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1994: 406-23
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Crippa BL, Aita ADC, Ferreira MIDC. Padronização das respostas eletrofisiológicas para o P300 em adultos normouvintes. Distúrb Comum 2011; 23: 325-333
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Duarte JL, Alvarenga KF, Banhara MR, Mello ADP, Sás RM, Costa Filho OA. Potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência-P300 em indivíduos normais: valor do registro simultâneo em Fz e Cz. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2009; 75: 231-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Machado CSS, Carvalho ACO, Silva PLG. Caracterização da normalidade do P300 em adultos jovens. Rev Soc Bras Fonoaudiol 2009; 14: 83-90
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Uppenkamp S, Johnsrude IS, Norris D, Marslen-Wilson W, Patterson RD. Locating the initial stages of speech-sound processing in human temporal cortex. Neuroimage 2006; 31 (3) 1284-1296
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Samson F, Zeffiro TA, Toussaint A, Belin P. Stimulus complexity and categorical effects in human auditory cortex: an activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis. Front Psychol 2010; 1: 241
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Martin BA, Tremblay KL, Korczak P. Speech evoked potentials: from the laboratory to the clinic. Ear Hear 2008; 29 (3) 285-313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Massa CGP, Rabelo CM, Matas CG, Schochat E, Samelli AG. P300 with verbal and nonverbal stimuli in normal hearing adults. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2011; 77 (6) 686-690
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lloyd II Kaplan. 1978 apud Momenshon-Santos TM; Russo ICP; Brunetto-Borgianni LM. Interpretação dos resultados da avaliação audiológica. In: Momenshon-Santos TM, Russo ICP. Prática da audiologia clínica. 6ed. São Paulo: Cortez; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Jerger J. Clinical experience with impedance audiometry. Arch Otolaryngol 1970; 92 (4) 311-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Swink S, Stuart A. Auditory long latency responses to tonal and speech stimuli. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2012; 55 (2) 447-459
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Albrecht R, Suchodoletz W, Uwer R. The development of auditory evoked dipole source activity from childhood to adulthood. Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 111 (12) 2268-2276
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Martin B, Tremblay K, Stapells D. Principles and applications of cortical auditory evoked potentials. In: Eggermont J, Don M. Auditory evoked potentials: basic principles and clinical application. Baltimore: 2007: 482-507
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Polat Z, Ataş A. The investigation of cortical auditory evoked potentials responses in young adults having musical education. Balkan Med J 2014; 31 (4) 328-334
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Kwong B, Don M. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: evidence from multi-channel evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 111 (2) 220-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Alvarenga KF, Vicente LC, Lopes RAF , et al. The influence of speech stimuli contrast in cortical auditory evoked potentials. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2013; 79 (3) 336-341
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Geal-Dor M, Kamenir Y, Babkoff H. Event related potentials (ERPs) and behavioral responses: comparison of tonal stimuli to speech stimuli in phonological and semantic tasks. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol 2005; 16 (2–3) 139-155
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Polich J, Herbst KL. P300 as a clinical assay: rationale, evaluation, and findings. Int J Psychophysiol 2000; 38 (1) 3-19
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Reis ACMB, Iório MCM. P300 em sujeitos com perda auditiva. Pró-fono Rev Atual Cient 2007; 19: 113-122
    Google Scholar