Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2023; 27(02): e248-e255
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1768210
Original Research

The Effect of Different Stimulation Rates on Brainstem Auditory-Evoked-Potential Responses

Authors

Preview

Abstract

Introduction Auditory-evoked potentials are influenced by several factors, including polarity, filter, stimulus intensity and stimulation rate. The presentation of higher rates of stimuli per second enables the collection of a greater number of responses in a given period of time, promoting a shorter testing time; however, the collected recordings are subject to changes related to wave morphology.

Objectives To compare the brainstem auditory-evoked-potential responses with click stimulus with the most commonly used stimulation rates in the clinical practice.

Methods The present cross-sectional analytical study was performed with fifteen participants of both genders and normal hearing thresholds. The brainstem auditory-evoked potential was performed at four different stimulation rates (21.1, 26.7, and 27.7 stimuli/s, and a rate determined based on a mathematical calculation using the a measurement of the transmission frequency of the power grid at the time of the examination).

Results We observed that the rate of 21.1 stimuli/s showed the highest amplitudes for waves I, III, and V when compared with the other rates. The rate of 26.7 stimuli/s, when compared with 27.7 stimuli/s, showed a higher amplitude for wave V. The latency if wave V was significantly lower with the rate of 21.1 stimuli/s than with 27.7 stimuli/s.

Conclusions The stimulation rate interferes with wave latencies and amplitudes; its decrease from 27.7 to 21.1 stimuli/s decreases the latency of wave V and increases the amplitues and improves the morphology of waves I, III and V. In addition, we found evidence that suggests an improvement in the visualization of wave III by adjusting the stimulation rate based on a measurement of the local transmission frequency of the power grid.

Author Contributions

1. Kelly Cristina Lira de Andrade: conception, study design, data acquisition, data analysis and discussion, and writing of the article.


2. Ana Cláudia Figueiredo Frizzo: conception, study design, data acquisition, data analysis and discussion, and writing of the article.


3. Katielle Menezes de Oliveira: data analysis and conception of the article.


4. Natália dos Santos Pinheiro: data acquisition, data analysis and discussion, and writing of the article.


5. Maria Cecilia dos Santos Marques: data acquisition, data analysis and discussion, and writing of the article.


6. Aline Tenório Lins Carnaúba: data acquisition, data analysis and discussion, and writing of the article.


7. Klinger Vagner Teixeira Costa: data acquisition, data analysis and discussion, and writing of the article.


8. Pedro de Lemos Menezes: conception, study design, data acquisition, data analysis and discussion, and writing of the article.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 03. Mai 2021

Angenommen: 17. Oktober 2021

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
28. April 2023

© 2023. Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil