Optimizing Otoacoustic Emission Protocols for a UNHS Program

Objective: To identify the optimal test protocol to screen for hearing problems in newborns, an evaluation of three distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) protocols was conducted in neonates, from a well-baby nursery (WBN) and from a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and compared to the performance in newborns of a more standard protocol based on transient-evoked OAEs (TEOAEs). Methods: The DPOAE protocols used asymmetrical stimulus intensities (L1 > L2) with a frequency ratio of 1.22, in the following format: (P1), L1 = 60, L2 = 50 dB SPL; (P2), L1 = 65, L2 = 55 dB SPL, and (P3), L1 = 75, L2 = 65 dB SPL. Linear TEOAE responses, evoked by click stimuli of 75 dB peSPL, were used as controls of normal cochlear function. Five frequencies at 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 kHz were tested with a common commercially available macro-based software subroutine (Otodynamics Corp, ILO-92). The project evaluated the responses from 1200 WBN infants (average age 48 h) and 350 low-birth-weight NICU infants, all randomly selected. Results: Statistical analyses comparing the signal-to-noise ratios (S/N), at the predefined f2 frequencies, indicated that the P1 and P2 DPOAE protocols generated similar responses. Significant S/N differences were observed in the P3 to P2 dataset comparisons. DPOAE scoring criteria were estimated from the P3 dataset using a one-sided, distribution-free confidence intervals. The scoring criteria for a ‘pass’ were estimated as a minimum S/N of 6.0, 7.0 and 6.0 dB at 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 kHz, respectively. In terms of feasibility, the P3 protocol generated responses in 98% of the WBN and 94.8% of the NICU infants. Conclusions: All three DPOAE protocols demonstrated shorter time-recording requirements than the standard TEOAE test. The false-positive and false-negative rates for the NICU infants were estimated as 0.0028 and 0.003%, respectively.

[1]  R. Kalluri,et al.  Distortion-product source unmixing: a test of the two-mechanism model for DPOAE generation. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Paul Avan,et al.  Physiopathological significance of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions at 2f1-f2 produced by high- versus low-level stimuli. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Christopher A Shera,et al.  Mechanisms of Mammalian Otoacoustic Emission and their Implications for the Clinical Utility of Otoacoustic Emissions , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[4]  C. Abdala Distortion product otoacoustic emission (2f1-f2) amplitude as a function of f2/f1 frequency ratio and primary tone level separation in human adults and neonates. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Yvonne Sininger,et al.  Identification of Neonatal Hearing Impairment: Evaluation of Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission, Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission, and Auditory Brain Stem Response Test Performance , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[6]  D A Nelson,et al.  Distortion-product emissions and auditory sensitivity in human ears with normal hearing and cochlear hearing loss. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[7]  M. J. McCoy,et al.  Dependence of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions on primary levels in normal and impaired ears. I. Effects of decreasing L2 below L1. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  A. Cacace,et al.  New York State Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Demonstration Project: Effects of Screening Protocol on Inpatient Outcome Measures , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[9]  Hector M Yee-Arellano,et al.  Universal newborn hearing screening in Mexico: results of the first 2 years. , 2006, International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

[10]  K. Stephan,et al.  Examples of implemented neonatal hearing screening programs in Austria , 2001, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[11]  J. Marco,et al.  Distortion product otoacoustic emissions in healthy newborns: normative data. , 1995, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[12]  A. Kumral,et al.  Feasibility of neonatal hearing screening program with two‐stage transient otoacoustic emissions in Turkey , 2007, Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric Society.

[13]  C. Yoshinaga-Itano Efficacy of Early Identification and Early Intervention , 1995 .

[14]  S Hatzopoulos,et al.  Optimization of TEOAE recording protocols: A linear protocol derived from parameters of a time-frequency analysis: a pilot study on neonatal subjects , 2000, Scandinavian audiology.

[15]  P. Clement,et al.  Reference data for DPOAE in healthy newborns , 2000, Scandinavian audiology.

[16]  A. Martini,et al.  Comparison of Neonatal Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission Responses Recorded with Linear and QuickScreen Protocols , 2000, Audiology.

[17]  R. Quiñónez Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPEs) in neonates: frequency ratio (F2/F1) and stimulus level differences (L1-L2). , 1999, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[18]  S. Neely,et al.  From Laboratory to Clinic: A Large Scale Study of Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions in Ears with Normal Hearing and Ears with Hearing Loss , 1997, Ear and hearing.

[19]  J. Guinan,et al.  Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  M. J. McCoy,et al.  Clinical Testing of Distortion‐Product Otoacoustic Emissions , 1993, Ear and hearing.

[21]  Thomas Janssen,et al.  Optimal L 1−L 2 primary tone level separation remains independent of test frequency in humans , 2000, Hearing Research.

[22]  B. Vohr,et al.  Identification of Neonatal Hearing Impairment: Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions during the Perinatal Period , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[23]  J. Petruccelli,et al.  A TEOAE screening protocol based on linear click stimuli: performance and scoring criteria. , 1999, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[24]  David T. Kemp,et al.  Suppressibility of the 2 f 1- f 2 stimulated acoustic emissions in gerbil and man , 1984, Hearing Research.

[25]  J. Petruccelli,et al.  Efficient otoacoustic emission protocols employed in a hospital-based neonatal screening program. , 2001, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[26]  J. Bamford,et al.  Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening , 2001 .

[27]  B. Vohr,et al.  Transient evoked otoacoustic emission-based screening in typical nurseries: a response to Jacobson and Jacobson. , 1995, International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

[28]  G. K. Martin,et al.  Acoustic distortion products in rabbit ear canal. II. Sites of origin revealed by suppression contours and pure-tone exposures , 1987, Hearing Research.

[29]  J. Connolly,et al.  Universal Newborn Hearing Screening: Are We Achieving the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) Objectives? , 2005, The Laryngoscope.

[30]  C. Abdala Distortion product otoacoustic emission (2f1-f2) amplitude growth in human adults and neonates. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  A. M. Brown,et al.  The behavior of the acoustic distortion product, 2f1-f2, from the human ear and its relation to auditory sensitivity. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  S J Norton,et al.  Vulnerability and adaptation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions to endocochlear potential variation. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  J. Smurzyński Longitudinal Measurements of Distortion‐Product and Click‐Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions of Preterm Infants: Preliminary Results , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[34]  K. White Universal newborn hearing screening using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions , 1995 .

[35]  P. TorricoRomán,et al.  Neonatal hearing loss screening using otoacoustic emission with Echocheck , 2001 .

[36]  R Probst,et al.  A review of otoacoustic emissions. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  T. Janssen,et al.  The level and growth behavior of the 2 f1-f2 distortion product otoacoustic emission and its relationship to auditory sensitivity in normal hearing and cochlear hearing loss. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  Paul Boege,et al.  Pure-tone threshold estimation from extrapolated distortion product otoacoustic emission I/O-functions in normal and cochlear hearing loss ears. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.