AuthorFroese, Kaitlyn Jolene
Auditory Brainstem Response
Compound Action Potential
Hidden Hearing Loss
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction, presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
EmbargoRelease after 05/24/2022
AbstractPurpose: To demonstrate CAP amplitude differences across various recording sites by simultaneously recording from peritympanic, TipTrode®, and surface electrodes placed on the earlobe/mastoid.Method: Examine CAP amplitude, latency, residual noise levels, and the signal-to-noise ratio by simultaneously recording from the tympanic membrane, the ear canal, and the earlobe or mastoid. Results: A significant effect of recording site on CAP amplitude was observed, demonstrating a clear advantage of the peritympanic electrode over the other two more distal recording electrodes, which were not statistically different in amplitude from one another. A similar effect of recording site on latency was observed in which the CAP latency was shorter at the peritympanic electrode, likely due to its proximity to the neural generator. Residual noise levels were highest and the signal-to-noise ratio was highest at the peritympanic electrode—a possible artifact of impedance imbalances, and ultimately, not clinically significant. Conclusions: The peritympanic electrode yields improved amplitude resolution over more typical, distal recording electrodes in the ear canal and earlobe or mastoid, making it a viable technique in the differential diagnosis of endolymphatic hydrops; however, the sensitivity and specificity of tests conducted with this electrode montage for the purpose of revealing hidden hearing loss needs further investigation.
Degree ProgramGraduate College
Speech, Language, & Hearing Sciences