Prediction Of Hearing Thresholds Using Multiple Auditory Steady-State Response And Tone-pip Evoked Auditory Brainstem Response

Objective To explore the prediction of hearing thresholds in normal-hearing adults using multiple auditory steady- state response (MASSR) and tone-pip evoked auditory brainstem response(Tp-ABR).Methods The response thresholds of MASSR and the behavioral thresholds were recorded from 28 normal hearing adults(56ears) at 0.5,1,2,and 4kHz. The response thresholds of Tp-ABR, the latency and the interpeak lantency of wave Ⅰ, Ⅲ,Ⅳ and the behavioral thresholds of Tp-ABR, were recorded from 28 normal hearing adults(56ears) at 0.5,1,2, and 4kHz.The results were performed using statistical analysis software(SPSS11.5).Results ① There were no significant differences between the right and the left ear for the response thresholds(P>0.05). There were significant difference at 0.5kHz for MASSR (P<0.001) , at other three frequentcies, no siginificant differences(P>0.05). Pearson correlations between the response thresholds and the behavioral thresholds were 0.71,0.83,0.86,0.87,with averages between the response thresholds and the behavioral thresholds were 13.9±5.8,10.3±4.7,10.2±3.9,8.1±4.5dB SPL for carrier frequencies 0.5, 1, 2, and 4kHz. ②There were significant difference at 0.5kHz for Tp-ABR (P<0.001) , at other three frequentcies, no siginificant differences(P>0.05). At 0.5, 1, 2, and 4kHz, peaison correlations between the response thresholds of Tp-ABR and the behavioral thresholds were 0.63,0.75, 0.88, 0.74,with average differences between the response threshold of Tp-ABR and the behavioral thresholds were 23.8±5.8,20.1±6.6,14.6±4.1,15.6±5.2dB. The differences between the response threshold of Tp-ABR and the behavioral threshold of Tp-ABR were 20.0±5.1,17.1±5.5,13.8±4.9,13.6±4.1dB nHL at 0.5,1,2, and 4kHz.The latency and the inteipeak lantency shortened with increasing of frequencies from 0.5 to 4 kHz,③There were significant difference at 0.5kHz for MASSR and Tp-ABR (P<0.001) , at other three frequentcies, no siginificant differences(P>0.05). At 0.5,1, 2, and 4kHz, pearson correlations between the response thresholds of MASSR and Tp-ABR were 0.69 ,0.85,0.87,0.81,with the response thresholds of MASSR and Tp-ABR were 34.6±7.9,24.2±7.6,25.5±7.5,26.7±7.9 dB SPL; 31.0±7.8,26.3±8.7,22.1±7.5,21.3±7.1 dB nHL at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4kHz. Between click-ABR thresholds and MASSR thresholdsaveraged at 0.5,1, 2 and 4kHz;at 1, 2 and 4kHz and at 2 and 4kHz, pearson correlation coefficients were 0.71,0.76,0.85,respectively. Between click-ABR thresholds and Tp-ABR thresholds averaged at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4kHz;at 1, 2 and 4kHz and at 2 and 4kHz, pearson correlation coefficients were 0.67,0.72,0.88,respectively.Corelation values were significant(r=0.88) at 2 and 4kHz.Conclusion This study illustrate that MASSR, Tp-ABR and PTA were highly correlated each other,especially at 1, 2, and 4kHz.There results support the use of MASSR as an alternative to Tp-ABR for thresholds assessment in normal-hearing adults. There were some advantages and caveats between MASSR and Tp-ABR.We should use MASSR with Tp-ABR to predict hearing thresholds.