Download PDF
Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 19(03): 255-258
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1546431
Original Research
Thieme Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Transient Evoked and Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions in a Group of Neonates

Giovanna Cesar Silva
1   Department of Speech Language and Hearing Therapy, UNESP-Marilia, Marília, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Camila Ribas Delecrode
1   Department of Speech Language and Hearing Therapy, UNESP-Marilia, Marília, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Adriana Tahara Kemp
1   Department of Speech Language and Hearing Therapy, UNESP-Marilia, Marília, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Fabiana Martins
2   Department of Fonoaudiologia, Maternity “Gota de Leite,” Marília, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Ana Claudia Vieira Cardoso
1   Department of Speech Language and Hearing Therapy, UNESP-Marilia, Marília, São Paulo, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

04 November 2014

10 January 2015

Publication Date:
02 March 2015 (online)

Also available at
  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction The most commonly used method in neonatal hearing screening programs is transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in the first stage of the process. There are few studies comparing transient evoked otoacoustic emissions with distortion product, but some authors have investigated the issue.

Objective To correlate the results of transient evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions in a Brazilian maternity hospital.

Methods This is a cross-sectional, comparative, and prospective study. The study included 579 newborns, ranging from 6 to 54 days of age, born in a low-risk maternity hospital and assessed for hearing loss. All neonates underwent hearing screening by transient evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions. The results were analyzed using the Spearman correlation test to relate the two procedures.

Results The pass index on transient evoked otoacoustic emissions was 95% and on distortion product otoacoustic emissions was 91%. The comparison of the two procedures showed that 91% of neonates passed on both procedures, 4.5% passed only on transient evoked otoacoustic emissions, 0.5% passed only on distortion product otoacoustic emissions, and 4% failed on both procedures. The inferential analysis showed a significant strong positive relationship between the two procedures.

Conclusion The failure rate was higher in distortion product otoacoustic emissions when compared with transient evoked; however, there was correlation between the results of the procedures.

Keywords

audiology - neonatal screening - hearing tests
 

  • References

  • 1 Rosseto DdeL, Ribeiro SC, Mendonça MP, Oliveira JA, Reis AC, Dutra SG. Análise das habilidades auditivas de um grupo de indivíduos com história de uso de drogas ilícitas. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2009; 75 (5) 685-693
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Pereira PKS, Azevedo MF, Testa JR. Conductive impairment in newborn who failed the newborn hearing screening. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2010; 76 (3) 347-354
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Year 2007 Position Statement: principles and guidelines forearly hearing detection and intervention programs. American Academy of Pediatrics, Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. 2007; 120 (4) 898-921
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 BRASIL. Lei n.12.303, de 2 de agosto de 2010. Dispõe sobre a obrigatoriedade de realização do exame demoninado Emissões Otoacústicas Evocadas. Portal da Legislaçãol: Leis Ordinárias. 2010. Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2007-2010/2010/Lei/L12303.htm
  • 5 Patel H, Feldman M. Canadian Paediatric Society, Community Paediatrics committee. Universal newborn hearing screening. Paediatr Child Health 2011; 16 (5) 301-305
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kemp DT. Otoacoustic emissions, their origin in cochlear function, and use. Br Med Bull 2002; 63: 223-241
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Keppler H, Dhooge I, Maes L , et al. Transient-evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions: a short-term test-retest reliability study. Int J Audiol 2010; 49 (2) 99-109
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Silva DP, Martins RH. Analysis of transient otoacoustic emissions and brainstem evoked auditory potentials in neonates with hyperbilirubinemia. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2009; 75 (3) 381-386
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Kemp DT, Bray P, Alexander L, Brown AM. Acoustic emission cochleography—practical aspects. Scand Audiol Suppl 1986; 25: 71-95
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Côrtes-Andrade IF, Bento DV, Lewis DR. Emissões Otoacústicas Evocadas por Estímulo Transiente: protocolos de Triagem Auditiva Neonatal. Rev CEFAC 2013; 15 (3) 521-527
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Azevedo MF. Emissões otoacústicas. In: Figueiredo MS, , ed. Conhecimentos para entender bem as emissões otoacústicas e BERA. São Paulo, Brazil: Pulso; 2003: 35-83
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Borges CAB, Moreira LMO, Pena GM, Fernandes FR, Borges BCB, Otani BH. Universal neonatal hearing screening. Intl. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol 2006; 10: 28-34
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 13 Ilha L, Kasse C, Mesquita Neto O, Almeida CR, Cruz OLM. Ototoxicidade induzida pela cisplatina em cobaias: efeito dose-dependente—avaliação funcional. Acta Otolaryngol 2007; 25: 112-118
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 14 Matas CG. Audiometria de tronco cerebral. In: Carvalho RMM, , ed. Fonoaudiologia: informacao para a formacao. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Guanabara Koogan; 2003: 43-57
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Benito-Orejas JI, Ramírez B, Morais D, Almaraz A, Fernández-Calvo JL. Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2008; 72 (8) 1193-1201
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Simonek MCS, Azevedo MF. Respostas falso-positivas na triagem auditiva neonatal universal: possíveis causas. Rev CEFAC 2011; 13 (2) 292-298
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Bubbico L, Bartolucci MA, Broglio D. The newborn hearing screening in Italy. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2005; 31: 290-292
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 De Capua B, Costantini D, Martufi C, Latini G, Gentile M, De Felice C. Universal neonatal hearing screening: the Siena (Italy) experience on 19,700 newborns. Early Hum Dev 2007; 83 (9) 601-606
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Lewis DR, Marone SA, Mendes BC, Cruz OL, Nóbrega Md. Multiprofessional committee on auditory health: COMUSA. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2010; 76 (1) 121-128
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Gilbey P, Kraus C, Ghanayim R, Sharabi-Nov A, Bretler S. Universal newborn hearing screening in Zefat, Israel: the first two years. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2013; 77 (1) 97-100
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Ghirri P, Liumbruno A, Lunardi S , et al. Universal neonatal audiological screening: experience of the University Hospital of Pisa. Ital J Pediatr 2011; 37: 16
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Dille M, Glattke TJ, Earl BR. Comparison of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions and distortion product otoacoustic emissions when screening hearing in preschool children in a community setting. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2007; 71 (11) 1789-1795
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Xue X, Zhong N. A study on the correlation between distortion product otoacoustic emissions and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions [article in Chinese]. Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi 2003; 17 (4) 198-200
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 Raineri GG, Coube CZV. 2, Costa Filho OA, Alvarenga KF. Emissões otoacústicas evocadas—produto de distorção em neonatos audiologicamente normais. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol (Engl Ed) 2001; 67 (5) 644-648
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Rodrigues PAL, Carvalho TSF, Lauris JRP, Schochat E. Results of a newborn hearing screening program in Cuiabá—Mato Grosso, Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Fonoaudiol 2011; 16: 454-458
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Françozo MdeF, Fernandes JC, Lima MCMP, Rossi TRF. Improvement of return rates in a neonatal hearing screening program: the contribution of social work. Soc Work Health Care 2007; 44 (3) 179-190
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Lima GM, Marba ST, Santos MF. Hearing screening in a neonatal intensive care unit. J Pediatr (Rio J) 2006; 82 (2) 110-114
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 28 Boscatto SD, Machado MS. Hearing screening of São Vicente de Paulo Hospital: survey data. Rev CEFAC 2013; 15: 1118-1124
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Md Daud MK, Sidek D, Abd Rahman N, Mansor S, Zakaria MN. The performance of distortion product otoacoustic emissions and automated auditory brainstem response in the same ear of the babies in neonatal unit. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2012; 76 (9) 1366-1369
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Costa JMD, Almeida VF, Oliveira CACP, Sampaio ALL. Transient and distortion product evoked otoacoustic emissions in premature infants. Intl Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009; 13 (3) 309-316
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 31 Bonfils P, Avan P, François M, Trotoux J, Narcy P. Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in neonates: normative data. Acta Otolaryngol 1992; 112 (5) 739-744
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Lonsbury-Martin BL, Whitehead ML, Martin GK. Clinical applications of otoacoustic emissions. J Speech Hear Res 1991; 34 (5) 964-981
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Lopes Filho O, Carlos R, Thomé D, Eckley C. Emissões otoacústicas transitórias e produtos de distorção na avaliação de recém-nascidos com poucas horas de vida. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 1996; 62 (3) 220-228
    Search in Google Scholar