Clinical Use of Aided Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials as a Measure of Physiological Detection or Physiological Discrimination

The clinical usefulness of aided cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) remains unclear despite several decades of research. One major contributor to this ambiguity is the wide range of variability across published studies and across individuals within a given study; some results demonstrate ex...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational Journal of Otolaryngology Vol. 2012; no. 2012; pp. 154 - 167
Main Authors Billings, Curtis J., Papesh, Melissa A., Penman, Tina M., Baltzell, Lucas S., Gallun, Frederick J.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Cairo, Egypt Hindawi Limiteds 01.01.2012
Hindawi Puplishing Corporation
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The clinical usefulness of aided cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) remains unclear despite several decades of research. One major contributor to this ambiguity is the wide range of variability across published studies and across individuals within a given study; some results demonstrate expected amplification effects, while others demonstrate limited or no amplification effects. Recent evidence indicates that some of the variability in amplification effects may be explained by distinguishing between experiments that focused on physiological detection of a stimulus versus those that differentiate responses to two audible signals, or physiological discrimination. Herein, we ask if either of these approaches is clinically feasible given the inherent challenges with aided CAEPs. N1 and P2 waves were elicited from 12 noise-masked normal-hearing individuals using hearing-aid-processed 1000-Hz pure tones. Stimulus levels were varied to study the effect of hearing-aid-signal/hearing-aid-noise audibility relative to the noise-masked thresholds. Results demonstrate that clinical use of aided CAEPs may be justified when determining whether audible stimuli are physiologically detectable relative to inaudible signals. However, differentiating aided CAEPs elicited from two suprathreshold stimuli (i.e., physiological discrimination) is problematic and should not be used for clinical decision making until a better understanding of the interaction between hearing-aid-processed stimuli and CAEPs can be established.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Academic Editor: Kelly Tremblay
ISSN:1687-9201
1687-921X
DOI:10.1155/2012/365752