Detection of Age-Related Hearing Losses (ARHL) via Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions.

PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to identify subjects presenting hearing deficits, specifically age-related hearing losses (ARHL), via objective assessment methodologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Initially, 259 subjects (165 men, 94 women) were enrolled in the study. After the application of inclusion criteria, the final number was reduced to 88 subjects (49.8 ± 19.1 ys) subdivided into 64 normal and 83 ARHL cases. The subjects were assessed with traditional audiometry tests and with transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs). Since each ear has its own acoustic signature, the TEOAE analyses were conducted in terms of ears and not subjects. The TEOAE data were processed by traditional and recurrence quantification analyses, leading to the estimation of the WWR (whole waveform reproducibility) and the new RAD2D (2-dimensional radius) parameters. A plot of WWR vs RAD2D was used to optimize the classification of the cases presenting ARHL. RESULTS: By using a WWR value of 70% as a classifier, the sensitivity of TEOAEs was estimated as 75.9% and the specificity as 89.1%. By using the RAD2D parameter (with a cut-off value of 1.78), a sensitivity value of 80.7% and a specificity value of 71.9% were obtained. When both parameters were used, a sensitivity value of 85.5% and a specificity value of 92.2% were estimated. In the latter classification paradigm, the number of false negatives decreased from 20 to 12 out of 83 ears (14%). CONCLUSION: In adult hearing screening assessments, the proposed method optimizes the identification of subjects with a hearing impairment correlated to the presence of age-related hearing loss.

Post-processing analysis of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions to detect 4 kHz-notch hearing impairment--a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: To identify a parameter to distinguish normal hearing from hearing impairment in the early stages. The parameter was obtained from transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs), overcoming the limitations of the usually adopted waveform descriptive parameters which may fail in standard clinical screenings. MATERIAL/METHODS: Audiometric examinations and TEOAE analysis were conducted on 15 normal ears and on 14 hearing-impaired ears that exhibited an audiometric notch around 4 kHz. TEOAE signals were analyzed through a multivariate technique to filter out the individual variability and to highlight the dynamic structure of the signals. The new parameter (named radius 2-dimension--RAD2D) was defined and evaluated for simulated TEOAE signals modeling a different amount of hearing impairment. RESULTS: Audiometric examinations indicated 14 ears as impaired-hearing (IH), while the TEOAE ILO92 whole reproducibility parameter (WWR) indicated as IH 7 signals out of 14 (50%). The proposed new parameter indicated as IH 9 signals out of 14 (64%), reducing the number of false negative cases of WWR. CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary study there is evidence that the new parameter RAD2D defines the topology and the quantification of the damage in the inner ear. The proposed protocol can be useful in hearing screenings to identify hearing impairments much earlier than conventional pure tone audiometry and TEOAE pass/fail test.

Otoacoustic emissions at different click intensities: invariant and subject-dependent features.

A study of click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs) elicited at stimulation intensities from 35 to >80 dB was carried out by recurrence quantification analysis on signals from both normal and hearing-impaired subjects. In normal subjects, a clear scaling of determinism with increasing stimulation intensity was observed in the click intensity range from 41 to 59 dB. Outside that range and, in particular, above its upper end, subject-dependent features appeared in the form of different maximal levels of determinism. A comparative analysis of responses from hearing-impaired subjects with conductive hearing losses and sensorineural hearing losses suggested that the principal contributor to this behavior is the middle ear and allowed us to discriminate the two pathologies solely on the basis of CEOAEs. These observations are consistent with a simple phenomenological model of the auditory periphery in which different functional modules are sequentially recruited at increasing stimulus intensities, with a consequent rise in CEOAE coherence.