Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Influence of artifacts and pass/refer criteria on otoacoustic emission hearing screening


Schmuziger, N; Lodwig, A; Probst, R (2006). Influence of artifacts and pass/refer criteria on otoacoustic emission hearing screening. International Journal of Audiology, 45(2):67-73.

Abstract

A screening device for otoacoustic emission (OAE) testing was evaluated via measurements of click evoked OAEs (CEOAEs) and/or distortion product OAEs (DPOAEs) obtained in normally hearing young adults and newborns. Moreover, measurements were performed in a passive cavity and in ears with severe sensorineural hearing loss, in which the occurrence of a pass result was assumed to indicate artifacts. Different parameter settings were investigated. In comparison to normally hearing young adults, overall pass rates in newborns were similar using CEOAEs (93 to 100%), but lower using DPOAEs (65 to 95% vs. 83 to 100%). Pass rates in ears with severe hearing loss were 10% at 2 kHz, 13% at 3 kHz, and lower at other frequencies. Pass rates in the test cavity were generally low. The influence of test frequency on pass rates and calculations using computer simulation indicated the presence of artifacts. The discrimination of such artifacts from biological signals is difficult or impossible, and they may represent a serious problem for efficient OAE screening.

Abstract

A screening device for otoacoustic emission (OAE) testing was evaluated via measurements of click evoked OAEs (CEOAEs) and/or distortion product OAEs (DPOAEs) obtained in normally hearing young adults and newborns. Moreover, measurements were performed in a passive cavity and in ears with severe sensorineural hearing loss, in which the occurrence of a pass result was assumed to indicate artifacts. Different parameter settings were investigated. In comparison to normally hearing young adults, overall pass rates in newborns were similar using CEOAEs (93 to 100%), but lower using DPOAEs (65 to 95% vs. 83 to 100%). Pass rates in ears with severe hearing loss were 10% at 2 kHz, 13% at 3 kHz, and lower at other frequencies. Pass rates in the test cavity were generally low. The influence of test frequency on pass rates and calculations using computer simulation indicated the presence of artifacts. The discrimination of such artifacts from biological signals is difficult or impossible, and they may represent a serious problem for efficient OAE screening.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
2 citations in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
3 citations in Microsoft Academic
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Otorhinolaryngology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2006
Deposited On:30 Mar 2009 10:33
Last Modified:19 Feb 2018 06:46
Publisher:Informa Healthcare
ISSN:1499-2027
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/14992020500376453
PubMed ID:16566244

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

Get full-text in a library