Speech-in-Noise Tests and Supra-threshold Auditory Evoked Potentials as Metrics for Noise Damage and Clinical Trial Outcome Measures

Otology and Neurotology

Volumn 37, Issue 8, 2016, Pages e295-e302

  Le Prell, Colleen G ^a   Brungart, Douglas S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS   (United States)

^b WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Audiology; Auditory evoked potentials; Speech in noise; Supra threshold

Indexed keywords

AUDITORY EVOKED POTENTIAL; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; EVOKED BRAIN STEM AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, NOISE-INDUCED; HUMAN; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY;

AUDITORY THRESHOLD; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY, BRAIN STEM; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, NOISE-INDUCED; HUMANS; MALE;

EID: 84983238977     PISSN: 15317129     EISSN: 15374505     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001069     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Le Prell CG, Hensley BN, Campbell KCM, et al. Hearing outcomes in a ''normally-hearing'' college-student population: Evidence of hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2011;50:S21-31.
2. Coles RR, Lutman ME, Buffin JT. Guidelines on the diagnosis of noise-induced hearing loss for medicolegal purposes. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2000;25:264-73.
3. Niskar AS, Kieszak SM, Holmes AE, et al. Estimated prevalence of noise-induced hearing threshold shifts among children 6 to 19 years of age: the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1994, United States. Pediatrics 2001;108:40-3.
4. Nondahl DM, Shi X, Cruickshanks KJ, et al. Notched audiograms and noise exposure history in older adults. Ear Hear 2009;30: 696-703.
5. Osei-Lah V, Yeoh LH. High frequency audiometric notch: An outpatient clinic survey. Int J Audiol 2010;49:95-8.
6. Hong O. Hearing loss among operating engineers in American construction industry. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2005; 78:565-74.
7. Konrad-Martin D, Reavis K, McMillan G, et al. Multivariate DPOAE metrics for identifying changes in hearing: Perspectives from ototoxicity monitoring. Int J Audiol 2012;1 (Suppl 1):S51-62.
8. Le Prell CG, Spankovich C, Lobarinas E, et al. Extended high frequency thresholds in college students: Effects of music player use and other recreational noise. J AmAcadAudiol 2013;24:725-39.
9. Le Prell CG, Lobarinas E. Strategies for assessing antioxidant efficacy in clinical trials. In: Miller JM, Le Prell CG, Rybak LP, editors. Oxidative Stress in Applied Basic Research and Clinical Practice: Free Radicals in ENT Pathology. New York: Humana Press; 2015. pp. 163-92.
10. Kujawa SG, Liberman MC. Synaptopathy in the noise-exposed and aging cochlea: Primary neural degeneration in acquired sensorineural hearing loss. Hear Res 2015;330:191-9.
11. Le Prell CG, Yagi M, Kawamoto K, et al. Chronic excitotoxicity in the guinea pig cochlea induces temporary functional deficits without disrupting otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;116: 1044-56.
12. Kujawa SG, Liberman MC. Adding insult to injury: Cochlear nerve degeneration after ''temporary'' noise-induced hearing loss. J Neurosci 2009;29:14077-85.
13. Kujawa SG, Liberman MC. Acceleration of age-related hearing loss by early noise exposure: Evidence of a misspent youth. J Neurosci 2006;26:2115-23.
14. Lin HW, Furman AC, Kujawa SG, et al. Primary neural degeneration in the guinea pig cochlea after reversible noise-induced threshold shift. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2011;12:605-16.
15. Wang Y, Ren C. Effects of repeated ''benign'' noise exposures in young CBA mice: Shedding light on age-related hearing loss. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2012;13:505-15.
16. Furman AC, Kujawa SG, Liberman MC. Noise-induced cochlear neuropathy is selective for fibers with low spontaneous rates. J Neurophysiol 2013;110:577-86.
17. Jensen JB, Lysaght AC, Liberman MC, et al. Immediate and delayed cochlear neuropathy after noise exposure in pubescent mice. PLoS One 2015;10:e0125160.
18. Hickox AE, Liberman MC. Is noise-induced cochlear neuropathy key to the generation of hyperacusis or tinnitus? J Neurophysiol 2014;111:552-64.
19. Le Prell CG, Spankovich C, White K, et al. Prevention of hearing loss using dietary supplements. Association for Research in Otolaryngology. Abs Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2015;38:500.
20. Lobarinas E, Spankovich C, Le Prell CG. Normal thresholds but poorer hearing in noise following a ''deafferenting'' exposure. Abs Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2015;38:447.
21. Maison SF, Usubuchi H, Liberman MC. Efferent feedback minimizes cochlear neuropathy from moderate noise exposure. J Neurosci 2013;33:5542-52.
22. Wan G, Gomez-Casati ME, Gigliello AR, et al. Neurotrophin-3 regulates ribbon synapse density in the cochlea and induces synapse regeneration after acoustic trauma. eLife 2014;3.
23. Makary CA, Shin J, Kujawa SG, et al. Age-related primary cochlear neuronal degeneration in human temporal bones. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2011;12:711-7.
24. Viana LM, O'Malley JT, Burgess BJ, et al. Cochlear neuropathy in human presbycusis: Confocal analysis of hidden hearing loss in post-mortem tissue. Hear Res 2015;327:78-88.
25. Sergeyenko Y, Lall K, Liberman MC, et al. Age-related cochlear synaptopathy: An early-onset contributor to auditory functional decline. J Neurosci 2013;33:13686-94.
26. Boettcher FA, White DR, Mills JH, et al. Age-related changes in auditory evoked potentials of gerbils. III. Low-frequency responses and repetition rate effects. Hear Res 1995;87:208-19.
27. Schmiedt RA, Mills JH, Boettcher FA. Age-related loss of activity of auditory-nerve fibers. J Neurophysiol 1996;76:2799-803.
28. Klein AJ, Mills JH. Physiological and psychophysical measures from humans with temporary threshold shift. J Acoust Soc Am 1981;70:1045-53.
29. Konrad-Martin D, Dille MF, McMillan G, et al. Age-related changes in the auditory brainstem response. J Am Acad Audiol 2012;23:18-35.
30. Samelli AG, Matas CG, Carvallo RM, et al. Audiological and electrophysiological assessment of professional pop/rock musicians. Noise Health 2012;14:6-12.
31. Stamper GC, Johnson TA. Auditory function in normal-hearing, noise-exposed human ears. Ear Hear 2015;36:172-84.
32. Hall JWI. Handbook of Auditory Evoked Responses. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 1992.
33. Stamper GC, Johnson TA. Letter to the Editor: Examination of Potential Sex Influences in. Auditory Function in Normal-Hearing, Noise-Exposed Human Ears, Ear Hear, 36, 172-184. Ear Hear 2015;36:738-40.
34. Gaddam A, Ferraro JA. ABR recordings in newborns using an ear canal electrode. Int J Audiol 2008;47:499-504.
35. Musiek FE, Kibbe K, Rackliffe L, et al. The auditory brain stem response IV amplitude ratio in normal, cochlear, and retrocochlear ears. Ear Hear 1984;5:52-5.
36. Plack CJ, Barker D, Prendergast G. Perceptual consequences of ''hidden'' hearing loss. Trends Hear 2014;18.
37. Bharadwaj HM, Verhulst S, Shaheen L, et al. Cochlear neuropathy and the coding of supra-threshold sound. Front Syst Neurosci 2014;8:26.
38. Bharadwaj HM, Masud S, Mehraei G, et al. Individual differences reveal correlates of hidden hearing deficits. J Neurosci 2015;35:2161-72.
39. Best V, Gallun FJ, Mason CR, et al. The impact of noise and hearing loss on the processing of simultaneous sentences. Ear Hear 2010;31:213-20.
40. Ruggles D, Bharadwaj H, Shinn-Cunningham BG. Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011;108:15516-21.
41. Kujawa SG. Putting the 'neural' back in sensorineural: Primary cochlear neurodegeneration in noise and aging. Hear J 2014;67:8.
42. Le Prell CG, Dell S, Hensley BN, et al. Digital music exposure reliably induces temporary threshold shift (TTS) in normal hearing human subjects. Ear Hear 2012;33:e44-58.
43. Spankovich C, Griffiths SK, Lobarinas E, et al. Temporary threshold shift after impulse-noise during video game play: Laboratory data. Int J Audiol 2014;53 (Suppl 2):S53-65.
44. Quist-Hanssen S, Thorud E, Aasand G. Noise-induced hearing loss and the comprehension of speech in noise. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1979;360:90-5.
45. Badri R, Siegel JH, Wright BA. Auditory filter shapes and highfrequency hearing in adults who have impaired speech in noise performance despite clinically normal audiogramsa. J Acoust Soc Am 2011;129:852-63.
46. Plomp R. A signal-to-noise ratio model for the speech-reception threshold of the hearing impaired. J Speech Hear Res 1986;29: 146-54.
47. Gurgel RK, Jackler RK, Dobie RA, et al. A new standardized format for reporting hearing outcome in clinical trials. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;147:803-7.
48. Carlson DL. American Academy of Audiology response to Gurgel et al. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2013;149:349-50.
49. Wilson RH. Clinical experience with the words-in-noise test on 3430 veterans: Comparisons with pure-tone thresholds and word recognition in quiet. J Am Acad Audiol 2011;22:405-23.
50. Carhart R, Tillman TW. Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing losses. Arch Otolaryngol 1970;91:273-9.
51. Carhart R. Basic principles of speech audiometry. Acta Otolaryngol 1951;40:62-71.
52. Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1994;95:1085-99.
53. Killion MC, Niquette PA, Gudmundsen GI, et al. Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;116:2395-405.
54. HearCom deliverable D-1-9. Report on an optimized inventory of speech-based auditory screening and impairment tests for six languages. FP6-004171 HearCom: Hearing in the Communication Society 2009;1-20.
55. Hey M, Hocke T, Hedderich J, et al. Investigation of a matrix sentence test in noise: Reproducibility and discrimination function in cochlear implant patients. Int J Audiol 2014;53:895-902.
56. Hernvig LH, Olsen SO. Learning effect when using the Danish Hagerman sentences (Dantale II) to determine speech reception threshold. Int J Audiol 2005;44:509-12.
57. Wagener K, Brand T, Kühnel V, et al. Development and evaluation of a set of tests in German I-III: Design, optimization, and evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test. Zeitschrift Audiol 1999;38:4-15. 44-56, 86-95.
58. Hagerman B. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol 1982;11:79-87.
59. Jansen S, Luts H, Wagener KC, et al. Comparison of three types of French speech-in-noise tests: A multi-center study. Int J Audiol 2012;51:164-73.
60. Le Prell CG, Lobarinas E. No relationship between recreational noise history and performance on the words-in-noise (WIN) test in normal hearing young adults. Association for Research Otolaryngology, 39th Midwinter Meeting Abstracts, Mt. Royal, NJ: Association for Research Otolaryngology, 2016:68.
61. Wilson RH, McArdle RA, Smith SL. An evaluation of the BKBSIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN materials on listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2007;50:844-56.
62. Wilson RH, McArdle R. Intra-and inter-session test, retest reliability of the Words-in-Noise (WIN) test. J Am Acad Audiol 2007;18:813-25.
63. Wilson RH, Carnell CS, Cleghorn AL. The Words-in-Noise (WIN) test with multitalker babble and speech-spectrum noise maskers. J Am Acad Audiol 2007;18:522-9.
64. Grant KW, Walden TC. Understanding excessive SNR loss in hearing-impaired listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 2013;24:258-73.
65. Watson CS, Kidd GR, Miller JD, et al. Telephone screening tests for functionally impaired hearing: Current use in seven countries and development of a US version. J Am Acad Audiol 2012;23: 757-67.
66. Jansen S, Luts H, Wagener KC, et al. The French digit triplet test: A hearing screening tool for speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol 2010;49:378-87.
67. Causon AE. The RNID online/telephone triplet digit test: A validation study. Institute of Sound And Vibration Research, 2012 (doctoral dissertation).
68. Füllgrabe C, Moore BCJ, Stone MA. Age-group differences in speech identification despite matched audiometrically normal hearing: Contributions from auditory temporal processing and cognition. Front Aging Neurosci 2015;6:347.
69. Hope AJ, Luxon LM, Bamiou DE. Effects of chronic noise exposure on speech-in-noise perception in the presence of normal audiometry. J Laryngol Otol 2013;127:233-8.
70. Remenschneider AK, Lookabaugh S, Aliphas A, et al. Otologic outcomes after blast injury: The Boston Marathon experience. Otol Neurotol 2014;35:1825-34.
71. Liberman MC, Kujawa SG. Hot Topics-Hidden hearing loss: Permanent cochlear-nerve degeneration after temporary noiseinduced threshold shift. J Acoust Soc Am 2014;135:2311.