Download PDF
Semin Hear 2016; 37(01): 009-024
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1570333
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials in (Un)aided Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Adults

Bram Van Dun
1   The HEARing CRC, Sydney, Australia
2   National Acoustic Laboratories, Sydney, Australia
,
Anna Kania
1   The HEARing CRC, Sydney, Australia
,
Harvey Dillon
1   The HEARing CRC, Sydney, Australia
2   National Acoustic Laboratories, Sydney, Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
04 February 2016 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) are influenced by the characteristics of the stimulus, including level and hearing aid gain. Previous studies have measured CAEPs aided and unaided in individuals with normal hearing. There is a significant difference between providing amplification to a person with normal hearing and a person with hearing loss. This study investigated this difference and the effects of stimulus signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and audibility on the CAEP amplitude in a population with hearing loss. Twelve normal-hearing participants and 12 participants with a hearing loss participated in this study. Three speech sounds—/m/, /g/, and /t/—were presented in the free field. Unaided stimuli were presented at 55, 65, and 75 dB sound pressure level (SPL) and aided stimuli at 55 dB SPL with three different gains in steps of 10 dB. CAEPs were recorded and their amplitudes analyzed. Stimulus SNRs and audibility were determined. No significant effect of stimulus level or hearing aid gain was found in normal hearers. Conversely, a significant effect was found in hearing-impaired individuals. Audibility of the signal, which in some cases is determined by the signal level relative to threshold and in other cases by the SNR, is the dominant factor explaining changes in CAEP amplitude. CAEPs can potentially be used to assess the effects of hearing aid gain in hearing-impaired users.

Keywords

Cortical auditory evoked potential - hearing-impaired - normal-hearing - hearing aid - signal-to-noise ratio - audibility
 

  • References

  • 1 Martin BA, Tremblay KL, Stapells DR. Principles and applications of cortical auditory evoked potentials. In: Burkard R, Eggermont J, Don M, , eds. Auditory Evoked Potentials: Basic Principles and Clinical Application. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2007: 482-507
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Kwong B, Don M. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: evidence from multi-channel evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 111 (2) 220-236
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Sharma A, Dorman MF, Spahr AJ. A sensitive period for the development of the central auditory system in children with cochlear implants: implications for age of implantation. Ear Hear 2002; 23 (6) 532-539
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Hyde M. The N1 response and its applications. Audiol Neurootol 1997; 2 (5) 281-307
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Lightfoot G. Summary of the N1–P2 cortical auditory evoked potential to estimate the auditory threshold in adults. Semin Hear 2016; 37 (01) 1-8
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Dillon H. So, baby, how does it sound? Cortical assessment of infants with hearing aids. Hear J 2005; 58 (10) 10-17
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Punch S, Van Dun B, King A, Carter L, Pearce W. Clinical experience of using cortical auditory evoked potentials in the treatment of infant hearing loss in Australia. Semin Hear 2016; 37 (01) 36-52
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Kosaner J, Bayguzina S, Gültekin M. Monitoring adequacy of audio processor programs and auditory maturity using aided cortical assessment (ACA). Paper presented at: World Congress of Audiology; May 3–7, 2014; Brisbane, Australia
    PubMed
  • 9 Gilley PM, Sharma A, Dorman M, Finley CC, Panch AS, Martin K. Minimization of cochlear implant stimulus artifact in cortical auditory evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2006; 117 (8) 1772-1782
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Mc Laughlin M, Lopez Valdes A, Reilly RB, Zeng FG. Cochlear implant artifact attenuation in late auditory evoked potentials: a single channel approach. Hear Res 2013; 302: 84-95
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Friesen LM, Picton TW. A method for removing cochlear implant artifact. Hear Res 2010; 259 (1–2) 95-106
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Sharma A, Campbell J, Cardon G. Developmental and cross-modal plasticity in deafness: evidence from the P1 and N1 event related potentials in cochlear implanted children. Int J Psychophysiol 2015; 95 (2) 135-144
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Sharma A, Martin K, Roland P , et al. P1 latency as a biomarker for central auditory development in children with hearing impairment. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (8) 564-573
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Ponton CW, Don M, Eggermont JJ, Waring MD, Kwong B, Masuda A. Auditory system plasticity in children after long periods of complete deafness. Neuroreport 1996; 8 (1) 61-65
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Purdy SC, Kelly AS. Changes in speech perception and auditory evoked potentials over time after unilateral cochlear implantation in postlinguistically deaf adults. Semin Hear 2016; 37 (01) 62-73
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Martin BA, Boothroyd A. Cortical, auditory, evoked potentials in response to changes of spectrum and amplitude. J Acoust Soc Am 2000; 107 (4) 2155-2161
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Won JH, Clinard CG, Kwon S , et al. Relationship between behavioral and physiological spectral-ripple discrimination. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2011; 12 (3) 375-393
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Ross B, Tremblay KL, Picton TW. Physiological detection of interaural phase differences. J Acoust Soc Am 2007; 121 (2) 1017-1027
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Miller S, Zhang Y. Neural coding of phonemic fricative contrast with and without hearing aid. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (4) e122-e133
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Picton T. Hearing in time: evoked potential studies of temporal processing. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (4) 385-401
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Tomlin D, Rance G. Maturation of the central auditory nervous system in children with auditory processing disorder. Semin Hear 2016; 37 (01) 74-83
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T, Ponton C, Otis B. Central auditory plasticity: changes in the N1-P2 complex after speech-sound training. Ear Hear 2001; 22 (2) 79-90
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Barlow N, Purdy SC, Sharma M, Giles E, Narne V. The effect of short-term auditory training on speech in noise perception and cortical auditory evoked potentials in adults with cochlear implants. Semin Hear 2016; 37 (01) 84-98
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Hoppe U, Rosanowski F, Iro H, Eysholdt U. Loudness perception and late auditory evoked potentials in adult cochlear implant users. Scand Audiol 2001; 30 (2) 119-125
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Bidelman GM, Villafuerte JW, Moreno S, Alain C. Age-related changes in the subcortical-cortical encoding and categorical perception of speech. Neurobiol Aging 2014; 35 (11) 2526-2540
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Ross B, Fujioka T, Tremblay KL, Picton TW. Aging in binaural hearing begins in mid-life: evidence from cortical auditory-evoked responses to changes in interaural phase. J Neurosci 2007; 27 (42) 11172-11178
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Tremblay KL, Piskosz M, Souza P. Effects of age and age-related hearing loss on the neural representation of speech cues. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114 (7) 1332-1343
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Barnet AB. EEG audiometry in children under three years of age. Acta Otolaryngol 1971; 72 (1) 1-13
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Rapin I, Graziani LJ. Auditory-evoked responses in normal, brain-damaged, and deaf infants. Neurology 1967; 17 (9) 881-894
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Billings CJ, Tremblay KL, Souza PE, Binns MA. Effects of hearing aid amplification and stimulus intensity on cortical auditory evoked potentials. Audiol Neurootol 2007; 12 (4) 234-246
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Billings CJ, Tremblay KL, Miller CW. Aided cortical auditory evoked potentials in response to changes in hearing aid gain. Int J Audiol 2011; 50 (7) 459-467
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Marynewich S, Jenstad LM, Stapells DR. Slow cortical potentials and amplification—Part I: N1–P2 measures. Int J Otolaryngol 2012; 2012: 921513
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Jenstad LM, Marynewich S, Stapells DR. Slow cortical potentials and amplification—Part II: Acoustic measures. Int J Otolaryngol 2012; 2012: 386542
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Cody DTR, Klass DW. Cortical audiometry. Potential pitfalls in testing. Arch Otolaryngol 1968; 88 (4) 396-406
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Korczak PA, Kurtzberg D, Stapells DR. Effects of sensorineural hearing loss and personal hearing aids on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing. Ear Hear 2005; 26 (2) 165-185
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Souza PE, Tremblay KL. New perspectives on assessing amplification effects. Trends Amplif 2006; 10 (3) 119-143
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Carter L, Golding M, Dillon H, Seymour J. The detection of infant cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) using statistical and visual detection techniques. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21 (5) 347-356
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Carter L, Dillon H, Seymour J, Seeto M, Van Dun B. Cortical auditory-evoked potentials (CAEPs) in adults in response to filtered speech stimuli. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (9) 807-822
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Chang HW, Dillon H, Carter L, van Dun B, Young ST. The relationship between cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP) detection and estimated audibility in infants with sensorineural hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2012; 51 (9) 663-670
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Golding M, Dillon H, Seymour J, Carter L. The detection of adult cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) using an automated statistic and visual detection. Int J Audiol 2009; 48 (12) 833-842
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Van Dun B, Carter L, Dillon H. Sensitivity of cortical auditory evoked potential detection for hearing-impaired infants in response to short speech sounds. Audiol Res 2012; 2e13: 65-76
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Hagerman B, Olofsson Å. A method to measure the effect of noise reduction algorithms using simultaneous speech and noise. Acta Acust United Acust 2004; 90 (2) 356-361
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 International Organisation for Standardization. Acoustics—Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment—Part 2: Reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for pure tones and insert earphones. Geneva, Switzerland; 1994
    PubMed
  • 44 American Electroencephalographic Society. American Electroencephalographic Society guidelines for standard electrode position nomenclature. J Clin Neurophysiol 1991; 8 (2) 200-202
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Billings C. Acoustic signal-to-noise ratios dominates auditory long latency responses. International Evoked Response Audiometry Study Group. June 9–13, 2013; New Orleans, LA, USA
    PubMed
  • 46 Picton TW, Woods DL, Baribeau-Braun J, Healey TMG. Evoked potential audiometry. J Otolaryngol 1976; 6 (2) 90-119
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Ross B, Lütkenhöner B, Pantev C, Hoke M. Frequency-specific threshold determination with the CERAgram method: basic principle and retrospective evaluation of data. Audiol Neurootol 1999; 4 (1) 12-27
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Tremblay KL, Billings CJ, Friesen LM, Souza PE. Neural representation of amplified speech sounds. Ear Hear 2006; 27 (2) 93-103
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Killion MC. Noise of ears and microphones. J Acoust Soc Am 1976; 59 (2) 424-433
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Billings CJ, Papesh MA, Penman TM, Baltzell LS, Gallun FJ. Clinical use of aided cortical auditory evoked potentials as a measure of physiological detection or physiological discrimination. Int J Otolaryngol 2012; 2012: 365752
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Ching TYC, Dillon H, Marnane V , et al. Outcomes of early- and late-identified children at 3 years of age: findings from a prospective population-based study. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (5) 535-552
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Easwar V, Glista D, Purcell DW, Scollie SD. Hearing aid processing changes tone burst onset: effect on cortical auditory evoked potentials in individuals with normal audiometric thresholds. Am J Audiol 2012; 21 (1) 82-90
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Easwar V, Purcell DW, Scollie SD. Electroacoustic comparison of hearing aid output of phonemes in running speech versus isolation: implications for aided cortical auditory evoked potentials testing. Int J Otolaryngol 2012; 2012: 518202
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Easwar V, Glista D, Purcell DW, Scollie SD. The effect of stimulus choice on cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEP): consideration of speech segment positioning within naturally produced speech. Int J Audiol 2012; 51 (12) 926-931
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Ching TYC, Zhang V, Hou S, Van Buynder P. Cortical auditory evoked potentials reveal changes in audibility with nonlinear frequency compression in hearing aids for children: clinical implications. Semin Hear 2016; 37 (01) 25-35
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 56 Glista D, Easwar V, Purcell DW, Scollie SD. A pilot study on cortical auditory evoked potentials in children: aided CAEPs reflect improved high-frequency audibility with frequency compression hearing aid technology. Int J Otolaryngol 2012; 2012: 982294
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 57 Picton TW, Alain C, Otten L, Ritter W, Achim A. Mismatch negativity: different water in the same river. Audiol Neurootol 2000; 5 (3–4) 111-139
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 58 Billings CJ. Uses and limitations of electrophysiology with hearing aids. Semin Hear 2013; 34 (4) 257-269
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 59 Tremblay KL, Kalstein L, Billings CJ, Souza PE. The neural representation of consonant-vowel transitions in adults who wear hearing aids. Trends Amplif 2006; 10 (3) 155-162
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar