Skip to main content

Comparing sound field audiometry and free field auditory steady state response in the verification of hearing aid fitting in adults

En

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this work was to establish hearing aid (HA) functional gain measurements using free field (FF) auditory steady-state response (ASSR) and to compare and correlate sound field (SF) versus ASSR functional gain and unaided and aided hearing thresholds in order to assess the reliability of FF ASSR as an objective tool for the verification of HA fitting.

Participants and methods

This study was conducted on 20 HA user adults with a mean age of 57.09±14.79 years. For each patient, the following were administered: history taking, basic audiological evaluation including pure tone audiometry and immittancemetry, unaided and aided SF audiometry thresholds, and unaided and aided FF ASSR thresholds. The results obtained were then compared. In addition, correlation studies between all the obtained results were carried out.

Results

A highly significant difference was found at 500 Hz only between the SF hearing thresholds and the FF ASSR thresholds among the unaided patients at the four test frequencies (500–4000 Hz). Similarly, aided SF and FF ASSR hearing thresholds showed a statistically significant difference only at 500 Hz. The results of correlation coefficient showed that unaided SF and FF ASSR thresholds were positively significantly correlated at 2 and 4 kHz. In addition, aided SF and FF ASSR thresholds were positively significantly correlated at 1 and 2 kHz. Comparison between the functional gain obtained using both SF and FF ASSR tests showed that there was a highly significant difference only at 4000 Hz.

Conclusion

SF audiometry and FF ASSR unaided and aided thresholds showed very similar results and this indicates that ASSR may be a good alternative method for the measurement of hearing level in infants and children, for whom pure tone audiometry is not possible. FF ASSR appears to be a reliable procedure for the verification of HA fitting and can be used to assess functional gain in difficult-to-test populations and children. Future research on the effect of the electroacoustic characteristics of HAs on aided FF ASSR thresholds is recommended.

References

  1. SAME. Manual of hearing measurement. Bromma, CA: Tegnér; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brookhouser PE, Gorga MP, Kelly WJ. Auditory brainstem response results as predictors of behavioral auditory thresholds in severe and profound hearing impairment. Laryngoscope. 1990; 100: 803–810

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Plourde G, Picton TW. Human auditory steady-state response during general anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 1990; 71: 460–468

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Aoyagi M, Fuse T, Suzuki T, Kim Y, Koike Y. An application of phase spectral analysis to amplitude-modulation following response. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1993; 504: 82–88

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gorga MP, Neely ST, Hoover BM, Dierking DM, Beauchaine KL, Manning C. Determining the upper limits of stimulation for auditory steady-state response measurements. Ear Hear. 2004; 25: 302–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zenker F, Delgado J, Barajas JJ. Acoustic characteristics and audiological applications of the long-term speech spectrum. Speech and Language Therapy and Audiology. 2003; 23: 13–20

    Google Scholar 

  7. Picton TW, Dimitrijevic A, van Roon P, John MS, Reed M, Finkelstein HSeewald RC, Gravel JS. Possible roles for the auditory steady state responses in fitting hearing-aids. A sound foundation through early amplification 2001. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference. 2002 Basel Phonak:63–73

  8. Muller HG, Hawkins DB, Northern JL. Probe microphone measurements: hearing-aid selection and assessment. San Diego, CA: Singular; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mokotoff B, Krebs DF. Brainstem auditory-evoked responses with amplification [Abstract]. J Acoust Soc Am. 1976; 60: 1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Herdman AT, Picton TW, Stapells DR. Place specificity of multiple auditory steady-state responses. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002; 112: 1569–1582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Picton TW, Durieux-Smith A, Champagne SC, Whittingham J, Moran LM, Giguère C, Beauregard Y. Objective evaluation of aided thresholds using auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol. 1998; 9: 315–331

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. John MS, Brown DK, Muir PJ, Picton TW. Recording auditory steady-state responses in young infants. Ear Hear. 2004; 25: 539–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. John MS, Picton TW. MASTER: a Windows program for recording multiple auditory steady-state responses. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2000; 61: 125–150

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zenker F, FernándezBelda R, Mora Espino R, Barajas de Prat JJ. The prescription of hearing aids features from the auditory steady state responses. Ninth Congress EFAS/6th Congress of the Spanish society of Audiology, Tenerife, Spain; 2009

  15. Lins OG, Picton TW. Auditory steady-state responses to multiple simultaneous stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1995; 96: 420–432

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ghannoum T, Selim M, El Shennawy A. Prediction of hearing threshold in infants and children: comparison of auditory steady-state response, auditory brain stem response and behavioral test methods. Egypt J Otolaryngol. 2009; 25: 20–27

    Google Scholar 

  17. Luts H, Desloovere C, Kumar A, Vandermeersch E, Wouters J. Objective assessment of frequency-specific hearing thresholds in babies. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2004; 68: 915–926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dimitrijevic A, John MS, Van Roon P, Purcell DW, Adamonis J, Ostroff J, et al. Estimating the audiogram using multiple auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol. 2002; 13: 205–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Perez-Abalo MC, Savio G, Torres A, Martín V, Rodríguez E, Galán L. Steady state responses to multiple amplitude-modulated tones: an optimized method to test frequency-specific thresholds in hearing-impaired children and normal-hearing subjects. Ear and Hear. 2001; 22: 200–211

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Swanepoel D, Erasmus H. Auditory steady-state responses for estimating moderate hearing loss. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2007; 264: 755–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ahn JH, Lee H-S, Kim Y-J, Yoon TH, Chung JW. Comparing pure-tone audiometry and auditory steady state response for the measurement of hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007; 136: 966–971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Duarte JL, Alvarenga Kde F, Garcia TM, Costa Filho OA, Lins OG. Auditory steady-state response in the auditory evaluation: clinical application. Pro Fono. 2008; 20: 105–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ballay C, Tonini R, Waninger T, Yoon C, Manolidis S. Steady-state response audiometry in a group of patients with steeply sloping sensorineural hearing loss. Laryngoscope. 2005; 115: 1243–1246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stroebel D. The clinical value of the auditory steady state response for early diagnosis and amplification for infants (0–8 months) with hearing loss [Online Master’s Dissertation]. Communication Pathology: University of Pretoria; 2006

  25. Stroebel D, Swanepoel D, Groenewald E. Aided auditory steady-state responses in infants. Int J Audiol. 2007; 46: 287–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Damarla VKS, Manjula P. Application of ASSR in the hearing aid selection process. Aust NZJ Audiol. 2007; 29: 89–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mona H. Selim.

Additional information

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Selim, M.H., Mourad, M.E., El-Shennawy, A.M. et al. Comparing sound field audiometry and free field auditory steady state response in the verification of hearing aid fitting in adults. Egypt J Otolaryngol 28, 201–207 (2012). https://doi.org/10.7123/01.EJO.0000418067.42430.a3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.7123/01.EJO.0000418067.42430.a3

Keywords

  • audiometry
  • auditory steady-state response
  • functional gain
  • hearing aid
  • sound field