You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 119 No. 8, August 1993 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Transiently Evoked and Distortion-Product Otoacoustic Emissions

Comparison of Results From Normally Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Human Ears

Rudolf Probst, MD; Frances P. Harris, PhD

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993;119(8):858-860.


Abstract

• Evoked otoacoustic emissions can be measured after a transient stimulus or as distortion products of two pure tones. Measurements of both emission types are being used more frequently as the techniques become easier to implement and the clinical benefits are realized. In addition, comparisons between the two types of emissions from the same ear provide information about cochlear mechanisms. We have measured transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) stimulated with clicks and distortionproduct otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) from 166 ears of individuals with and without hearing impairment. The TEOAE and DPOAE amplitudes were compared with each other and with corresponding audiometric thresholds by frequency. Results revealed a high correspondence between the two emission types (r=.78) and between the distribution of the energy for each emission and audiometric threshold levels at corresponding frequencies (DPOAE, Spearman {rho}=–.84; TEOAE, {rho}=–.77). The DPOAEs were present more often than were TEOAEs when hearing levels across frequency were greater than 30-dB hearing level. The results suggest that both TEOAEs and DPOAEs are derived largely from similar mechanisms. The differences between the occurrence of the two emissions by audiometric threshold level would suggest that TEOAEs may be preferable for screening purposes, whereas DPOAEs may be more valuable for monitoring cochlear changes clinically.

(Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993;119:858-860)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kantonsspital, Basel, Switzerland.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication November 20, 1992.

Read in part before the Symposium on Natural and Artificial Control of Hearing and Balance, Rheinfelden, Switzerland, September 5, 1991.

Reprint requests to Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kantonsspital, CH-4031 Basel, Switzerland (Dr Probst).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1993 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.