Download PDF
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

Kelly Cristina Lira de Andrade 
1   Department of Audiology, Universidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde de Alagoas (UNCISAL), Maceió, AL, Brazil
,
Ana Cláudia Figueiredo Frizzo 
2   Department of Audiology, Graduate program in speech therapy, Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho” (UNESP), Marília, SP, Brazil
,
Katielle Menezes de Oliveira 
1   Department of Audiology, Universidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde de Alagoas (UNCISAL), Maceió, AL, Brazil
,
Natália dos Santos Pinheiro 
3   Department of Audiology, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE)
,
Maria Cecilia dos Santos Marques 
3   Department of Audiology, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE)
,
Aline Tenório Lins Carnaúba 
1   Department of Audiology, Universidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde de Alagoas (UNCISAL), Maceió, AL, Brazil
,
Klinger Vagner Teixeira Costa 
4   Department of Medicine, Centro Universitário CESMAC, Maceió, AL, Brazil
,
Pedro de Lemos Menezes 
1   Department of Audiology, Universidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde de Alagoas (UNCISAL), Maceió, AL, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

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.

Keywords

hearing - electrophysiology - evoked potentials

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.




Publication History

Received: 03 May 2021

Accepted: 17 October 2021

Article published online:
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

 

  • References

  • 1 Andrade KCL, Pinheiro NS, Carnaúba AT, Menezes PL. Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Tronco Encefálico: conceitos e aplicações clínicas. In: Menezes PL. et al. (org.). Tratado de Eletrofisiologia para Audiologia. 1. Ed.. São Paulo: Book Toy; 2018: 73-83
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Hall JW. Application of ABR in Objective Assessment of Infant Hearing. Audiology Online. 2013: p.1-17
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Bakhos D, Marx M, Villeneuve A, Lescanne E, Kim S, Robier A. Electrophysiological exploration of hearing. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 2017; 134 (05) 325-331
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Souza LCA, Piza MRT, Alvarenga KF. et al. Eletrofisiologia da audição e Emissões Otoacústicas princípios e aplicações clínicas. Ribeirão Preto: BookToy; 2016. , p. 49–87.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Rosa BCS, Cesar CP, Cabral A, Santos M, Santos R. Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Tronco Encefálico com estímulos clique e Ichirp. Distúrb Comun 2018; 30 (01) 52-59
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Esteves MCBN, Aringa AHBD, Arruda GV, Aringa ARD, Nardi JC. Estudo das latências das ondas dos potenciais auditivos de tronco encefálico em indivíduos normo-ouvintes. J Bras Otorrinolaringologia. 2009; 75 (03) 420-425
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Stockard JJ, Stockard JE, Sharbrough FW. Nonpathologic Factors Influencing Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials. Am J EEG Technol 1978; 18 (04) 177-209
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Abulebda K, Patel VJ, Ahmed SS, Tori AJ, Lutfi R, Abu-Sultaneh S. Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol (Engl Ed) 2019; 85 (01) 32-36
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Cargnelutti M. Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Tronco Encefálico com estímulo clique e ichirp em neonatos. Rio Grande do Sul: Universidade Federal de Santa Maria; 2016: 80 p
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Beatini JR, Proudfoot GA, Gall MD. Effects of presentation rate and onset time on auditory brainstem responses in Northern saw-whet owls (Aegolius acadicus). J Acoust Soc Am 2019; 145 (04) 2062-2071
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Møller AR. Intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring. Am J Otol 1995; 16 (01) 115-117
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hood LJ. Clinical applications of the Auditory Brainstem Response: introduction and overview. San Diego; London: Singular Publishing; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Bussab WO, Morettin PA. Estatística Básica. 5ª edição. São Paulo: Saraiva,; 2002. . p. 272.
    Google Scholar
  • 14 American National Standard Institute. Specifications for audiometers. ANSI S3.6. EUA. 1991
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Arruda EF. Análise de distúrbios relacionados com a qualidade da energia elétrica utilizando a transformada Walevet. São Carlos: Universidade de São Paulo; 2003. . 136 p.
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Bento DV. Influência da Taxa de Repetição do Estímulo Clique na Latência e Amplitude do Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Tronco Encefálico. São Paulo: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo; 2012. . 106 p.
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Cubero-Rego L, Ricardo-Garcell J, Corsi-Cabrera M. et al. Improving the efficiency of Auditory Brainstem Responses in newborns, using a 60clicks/s stimulation rate. J Clin Neurosci 2017; 45: 299-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Committee on Infant Hearing American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Guidelines for the audiologic assessment of children from birth through 36 months of age. ASHA Suppl 1991; 33 (05) 37-43
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Fávero ML, Silva FLC, Junior AT, Nicastro FS, Gudmond MC, Spinelli M. Mudanças nos parâmetros do clique durante a captação do BERA. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol 2007; 73 (01) 7-11
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Griz SMS, Menezes PL. Potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico: parâmetros técnicos. In: Menezes PL. (org.). Tratado de Eletrofisiologia para Audiologia. 1. ed. São Paulo: Book Toy; 2018: p. 65-73
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Ankmnal-Veeranna S, Allan C, Allen P. Auditory Brainstem Responses in Children with Auditory Processing Disorder. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; 30 (10) 904-917
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Burkard RF, Don M. The auditory brainstem response. In: Burkard RF, Don M, Eggermont JJ. eds. Auditory evoked potentials basic principles and clinical application. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007: 229-250
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Don M, Allen AR, Starr A. Effect of click rate on the latency of auditory brain stem responses in humans. Ann. Washington: University Department of Otolaryngology.; 1997. . p. 186–195.
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Stapells D. Auditory brainstem response assessment of infants and children. Semin Hear 1989; 10 (03) 229-251
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Azambuja AA, Oliveira JR, Pereira LLM, Giaretta DS. Potencial de ação. In: Oliveira JR. (org.). Biofísica: para ciências biomédicas. 4. ed. Porto Alegre: PUCRS; 2014: p. 57-69
    Google Scholar