Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 2020; 31(06): 455-468
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.19046
Tutorial
American Academy of Audiology. All rights reserved. (2020) American Academy of Audiology

Protocol for Rapid, Accurate, Electrophysiologic, Auditory Assessment of Infants and Toddlers

Yvonne S. Sininger
1   C & Y Consultants, Santa Fe, NM
,
Lisa L. Hunter
2   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH
3   Department of Communication Disorders, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH
,
Patricia A. Roush
4   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina Medical Center, Chapel Hill, NC
,
Sue Windmill
2   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH
,
Deborah Hayes
5   Department of Pediatrics, Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO
6   Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO
,
Kristin M. Uhler
5   Department of Pediatrics, Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO
6   Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO
› Author Affiliations Funding This study was supported by a grant from the Oticon Foundation.
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
03 August 2020 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Audiologists often lack confidence in results produced by current protocols for diagnostic electrophysiologic testing of infants. This leads to repeat testing appointments and slow protocols which extend the time needed to complete the testing and consequently delay fitting of amplification. A recent publication (Sininger et al[50]) has shown how new technologies can be applied to electrophysiologic testing systems to improve confidence in results and allow faster test protocols. Average test times for complete audiogram predictions when using new technologies and protocols were found to be just over 32 minutes using auditory brainstem response (ABR) and just under 20 minutes using auditory steady-state response (ASSR) technology.

Purpose The purpose of this manuscript is to provide details of expedited test protocols for infant and toddler diagnostic electrophysiologic testing.

Summary Several new technologies and their role in test speed and confidence are described including CE-Chirp stimuli, automated detection of ABRs using a technique called F MP, Bayesian weighting which is an alternative to standard artifact rejection and Next-Generation ASSR with improved response detection and chirp stimuli. The test protocol has the following features: (1) preliminary testing includes impedance measures and otoacoustic emissions, (2) starting test levels are based on Broad-Band CE-Chirp thresholds in each ear, (3) ABRs or ASSRs are considered present based on automated detection rather than on replication of responses, (4) number of test levels is minimized, (5) ASSR generally evaluates four frequencies in each ear simultaneously with flexibility to change all test levels independently.

Conclusions Combining new technologies with common-sense strategies has been shown to substantially reduce test times for predicting audiometric thresholds in infants and toddlers (Sininger et al[50]). Details and rationales for changing test strategies and protocols are given and case examples are used to illustrate.

Keywords

audiology - auditory - auditory brainstem response - auditory steady-state response - auditory threshold - Bayesian weighting - CE-chirp - distortion-product otoacoustic emissions - evoked potentials
 

  • References

  • 1 Aithal S, Kei J, Driscoll C, Khan A, Swanston A. Wideband Absorbance outcomes in newborns: a comparison with high-frequency tympanometry, automated brainstem response, and transient evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions. Ear Hear 2015; 36 (05) e237-e250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Aithal V, Kei J, Driscoll C, Murakoshi M, Wada H. Predictive accuracy of sweep frequency impedance technology in identifying conductive conditions in newborns. J Am Acad Audiol 2018; 29 (02) 106-117
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Blankenship CM, Hunter LL, Keefe DH, Feeney MP, Brown DK, McCune A, Fitzpatrick DF, Lin L. Optimizing clinical interpretation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions in infants. Ear Hear 2018; 39: 1075-1090
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cebulla M, Elberling C. Auditory brain stem responses evoked by different chirps based on different delay models. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21 (07) 452-460
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cebulla M, Lurz H, Shehata-Dieler W. Evaluation of waveform, latency and amplitude values of chirp ABR in newborns. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 78 (04) 631-636
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Cebulla M, Sturzebecher E. Automated auditory response detection: further improvement of the statistical test strategy by using progressive test steps of iteration. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (08) 568-572
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Cebulla M, Sturzebecher E, Elberling C. Objective detection of auditory steady-state responses: comparison of one-sample and q-sample tests. J Am Acad Audiol 2006; 17 (02) 93-103
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cebulla M, Sturzebecher E, Elberling C, Muller J. New clicklike stimuli for hearing testing. J Am Acad Audiol 2007; 18 (09) 725-738
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Cho SW, Han KH, Jang HK, Chang SO, Jung H, Lee JH. Auditory brainstem responses to CE-Chirp(R) stimuli for normal ears and those with sensorineural hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (10) 700-704
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Cobb KM, Stuart A. Auditory brainstem response thresholds to air- and bone-conducted CE-chirps in neonates and adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2016; 59 (04) 853-859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Cobb KM, Stuart A. Neonate auditory brainstem responses to CE-chirp and CE-chirp octave band stimuli I: versus click and tone burst stimuli. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (06) 710-723
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cone-Wesson B, Ramirez GM. Hearing sensitivity in newborns estimated from ABRs to bone-conducted sounds. J Am Acad Audiol 1997; 08 (05) 299-307
    Google Scholar
  • 13 de Boer E. A cylindrical cochlea model: the bridge between two and three dimensions. Hear Res 1980; 3 (02) 109-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Don M, Elberling C. Evaluating residual background noise in human auditory brain-stem responses. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 96 (05 Pt 1): 2746-2757
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Don M, Elberling C. Use of quantitative measures of auditory brain-stem response peak amplitude and residual background noise in the decision to stop averaging. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 99 (01) 491-499
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Don M, Elberling C, Waring M. Objective detection of averaged auditory brainstem responses. Scand Audiol 1984; 13 (04) 219-228
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Dworsak-Dodge M, Gravel J, Grimes A, Hunter L, Johnson K, Neault M, Yellin W. Audiologic Guidelines for the Assessment of Hearing in Infants and Young Children. 2012 . www.Audiology.org
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Elberling C, Callo J, Don M. Evaluating auditory brainstem responses to different chirp stimuli at three levels of stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 2010; 128 (01) 215-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Elberling C, Don M. Quality estimation of averaged auditory brainstem responses. Scand Audiol 1984; 13 (03) 187-197
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Elberling C, Don M. Detection functions for the human auditory brainstem response. Scand Audiol 1987; 16 (02) 89-92
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Elberling C, Don M. Auditory brainstem responses to a chirp stimulus designed from derived-band latencies in normalhearing subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 2008; 124 (05) 3022-3037
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Elberling C, Don M. A direct approach for the design of chirp stimuli used for the recording of auditory brainstem responses. J Acoust Soc Am 2010; 128 (05) 2955-2964
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Elberling C, Don M, Cebulla M, Sturzebecher E. Auditory steady-state responses to chirp stimuli based on cochlear traveling wave delay. J Acoust Soc Am 2007; 122 (05) 2772-2785
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Elberling C, Don M, Kristensen SG. Auditory brainstem responses to chirps delivered by an insert earphone with equalized frequency response. J Acoust Soc Am 2012; 132 (02) El149-El154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Elberling C, Wahlgreen O. Estimation of auditory brainstem response, ABR, by means of Bayesian inference. Scand Audiol 1985; 14 (02) 89-96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ferm I, Lightfoot G. Further comparisons of ABR response amplitudes, test time, and estimation of hearing threshold using frequency-specific chirp and tone pip stimuli in newborns: findings at 0.5 and 2 kHz. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (10) 745-750
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ferm I, Lightfoot G, Stevens J. Comparison of ABR response amplitude, test time, and estimation of hearing threshold using frequency specific chirp and tone pip stimuli in newborns. IntJ Audiol 2013; 52 (06) 419-423
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Ferm I, Lightfoot G, Stevens J. Provisional stimulus level corrections for low frequency bone-conduction ABR in babies under three months corrected age. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (02) 132-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hunter LL, Keefe DH, Feeney MP, Brown DK, Meinzen-Derr J, Elsayed AM, Amann JM, Manickam V, Fitzpatrick D, Shott SR. Wideband acoustic immittance in children with Down syndrome: prediction of middle-ear dysfunction, conductive hearing loss and patent PE tubes. Int J Audiol 2017; 56 (09) 622-634
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Hunter LL, Keefe DH, Feeney MP, Fitzpatrick DF. Pressurized wideband acoustic stapedial reflex thresholds: normal development and relationships to auditory function in infants. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2017; 18 (01) 49-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Hunter LL, Keefe DH, Feeney MP, Fitzpatrick DF, Lin L. Longitudinal development of wideband reflectance tympanometry in normal and at-risk infants. Hear Res 2016; 340: 3-14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Hunter LL, Prieve BA, Kei J, Sanford CA. Pediatric applications of wideband acoustic immittance measures. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (01) 36s-42s
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hyde M, Sininger YS, Don M. Objective detection and analysis of auditory brainstem response: an historical perspective. Semin Hearing 1998; 19 (01) 16
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Janssen RM, Usher L, Stapells DR. The British Columbia’s Children’s Hospital tone-evoked auditory brainstem response protocol: how long do infants sleep and how much information can be obtained in one appointment?. Ear Hear 2010; 31 (05) 722-724
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Jerger J, Hayes D. The cross-check principle in pediatric audiometry. Arch Otolaryngol 1976; 102 (10) 7
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Joint-Committee-On-Infant-Hearing. Year 2007 position statement: priniciples and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs. Pediatrics 2007; 120: 23
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Korczak P, Smart J, Delgado R, Strobel TM, Bradford C. Auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (03) 146-170
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Kristensen SG, Elberling C. Auditory brainstem responses to level-specific chirps in normal-hearing adults. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (09) 712-721
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Lightfoot G, Stevens J. Effects of artefact rejection and Bayesian weighted averaging on the efficiency of recording the newborn ABR. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (02) 213-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 McCreery RW, Kaminski J, Beauchaine K, Lenzen N, Simms K, Gorga MP. The impact of degree of hearing loss on auditory brainstem response predictions of behavioral thresholds. Ear Hear 2015; 36 (03) 309-319
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Michel F, Jorgensen KF. Comparison of threshold estimation in infants with hearing loss or normal hearing using auditory steady-state response evoked by narrow band CE-chirps and auditory brainstem response evoked by tone pips. Int J Audiol 2017; 56 (02) 99-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Myers J, Kei J, Aithal S, Aithal V, Driscoll C, Khan A, Manuel A, Joseph A, Malicka AN. Development of a diagnostic prediction model for conductive conditions in neonates using wideband acoustic immittance. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (06) 1116-1135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Myers J, Kei J, Aithal S, Aithal V, Driscoll C, Khan A, Manuel A, Joseph A, Malicka AN. Diagnosing middle ear pathology in 6- to 9-month-old infants using wideband absorbance: a risk prediction model. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2018; 61 (09) 2386-2404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Prieve BA, Vander Werff KR, Preston JL, Georgantas L. Identification of conductive hearing loss in young infants using tympanometry and wideband reflectance. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (02) 168-178
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Rodrigues GR, Lewis DR. Establishing auditory steady-state response thresholds to narrow band CE-chirps in full-term neonates. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 78 (02) 238-243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Sininger YS. Auditory brain stem response for objective measures of hearing. Ear Hear 1993; 14 (01) 23-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Sininger YS. Filtering and spectral characteristics of averaged auditory brain-stem response and background noise in infants. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 98 (04) 2048-2055
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Sininger YS, Abdala C, Cone-Wesson B. Auditory threshold sensitivity of the human neonate as measured by the auditory brainstem response. Hear Res 1997; 104 (1-2): 27-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Sininger YS, Grimes A, Christensen E. Auditory development in early amplified children: factors influencing auditory-based communication outcomes in children with hearing loss. Ear Hear 2010; 31 (02) 166-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Sininger YS, Hunter LL, Hayes D, Roush PA, Uhler KM. Evaluation of speed and accuracy of next-generation auditory steady state response and auditory brainstem response audiometry in children with normal hearing and hearing loss. Ear Hear 2018; 39: 1207-1223
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Spivak LG. Spectral composition of infant auditory brainstem responses: implications for filtering. Audiology 1993; 32 (03) 185-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Stapells DR, Gravel JS, Martin BA. Thresholds for auditory brain stem responses to tones in notched noise from infants and young children with normal hearing or sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear 1995; 16 (04) 361-371
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Starr A, Sininger Y, Nguyen T, Michalewski HJ, Oba S, Abdala C. Cochlear receptor (microphonic and summating potentials, otoacoustic emissions) and auditory pathway (auditory brain stem potentials) activity in auditory neuropathy. Ear Hear 2001; 22 (02) 91-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Stuart A, Cobb KM. Effect of stimulus and number of sweeps on the neonate auditory brainstem response. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (05) 585-588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Stuart A, Yang EY. Effect of high-pass filtering on the neonatal auditory brainstem response to air- and bone-conducted clicks. J Speech Hear Res 1994; 37 (02) 475-479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Sturzebecher E, Cebulla M. Automated auditory response detection: improvement of the statistical test strategy. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (12) 861-864
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Sturzebecher E, Cebulla M, Elberling C. Automated auditory response detection: statistical problems with repeated testing. Int J Audiol 2005; 44 (02) 110-117
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Sturzebecher E, Cebulla M, Elberling C, Berger T. New efficient stimuli for evoking frequency-specific auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol 2006; 17 (06) 448-461
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Van Maanen A, Stapells DR. Multiple-ASSR thresholds in infants and young children with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21 (08) 535-545
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Vander Werff KR. Accuracy and time efficiency of two ASSR analysis methods using clinical test protocols. J Am Acad Audiol 2009; 20 (07) 433-452
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Yoshinaga-Itano C. From screening to early identification and intervention: discovering predictors to successful outcomes for children with significant hearing loss. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2003; 08 (01) 11-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Yoshinaga-Itano C, Sedey AL, Wiggin M, Chung W. Early hearing detection and vocabulary of children with hearing loss. Pediatrics 2017 140. (02). doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-2964
    PubMedGoogle Scholar