TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinicians’ guide to obtaining a valid auditory brainstem response to determine hearing status
T2 - Signal, noise, and cross-checks
AU - Norrix, Linda W.
AU - Velenovsky, David
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
PY - 2018/3
Y1 - 2018/3
N2 - Purpose: The auditory brainstem response (ABR) is a powerful tool for making clinical decisions about the presence, degree, and type of hearing loss in individuals in whom behavioral hearing thresholds cannot be obtained or are not reliable. Although the test is objective, interpretation of the results is subjective. Method: This review provides information about evidence-based criteria, suggested by the 2013 Newborn Hearing Screening Program guidelines, and the use of cross-check methods for making valid interpretations about hearing status from ABR recordings. Results: The use of an appropriate display scale setting, templates of expected response properties, and objective criteria to estimate the residual noise, signal level, and signal-to-noise ratio will provide quality data for determining ABR thresholds. Cross-checks (e.g., immittance measures, otoacoustic emissions testing, functional indications of a child’s hearing) are also needed to accurately interpret the ABR. Conclusions: Using evidence-based ABR signal detection criteria and considering the results within the context of other physiologic tests and assessments of hearing function will improve the clinician’s accuracy for detecting hearing loss and, when present, the degree of hearing loss. Diagnostic accuracy will ensure that appropriate remediation is initiated and that children or infants with normal hearing are not subjected to unnecessary intervention.
AB - Purpose: The auditory brainstem response (ABR) is a powerful tool for making clinical decisions about the presence, degree, and type of hearing loss in individuals in whom behavioral hearing thresholds cannot be obtained or are not reliable. Although the test is objective, interpretation of the results is subjective. Method: This review provides information about evidence-based criteria, suggested by the 2013 Newborn Hearing Screening Program guidelines, and the use of cross-check methods for making valid interpretations about hearing status from ABR recordings. Results: The use of an appropriate display scale setting, templates of expected response properties, and objective criteria to estimate the residual noise, signal level, and signal-to-noise ratio will provide quality data for determining ABR thresholds. Cross-checks (e.g., immittance measures, otoacoustic emissions testing, functional indications of a child’s hearing) are also needed to accurately interpret the ABR. Conclusions: Using evidence-based ABR signal detection criteria and considering the results within the context of other physiologic tests and assessments of hearing function will improve the clinician’s accuracy for detecting hearing loss and, when present, the degree of hearing loss. Diagnostic accuracy will ensure that appropriate remediation is initiated and that children or infants with normal hearing are not subjected to unnecessary intervention.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043590174&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043590174&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0074
DO - 10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0074
M3 - Article
C2 - 29392291
AN - SCOPUS:85043590174
SN - 1059-0889
VL - 27
SP - 25
EP - 36
JO - American journal of audiology
JF - American journal of audiology
IS - 1
ER -