METHOD: A prospective analysis was conducted on 173 patients (346 ears) with cleft lip and palate (CL/P) who presented to the combined cleft clinic at University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) over 12 months. The patients' hearing status was determined using otoacoustic emission (OAE), pure tone audiometry (PTA) and auditory brainstem response (ABR). These results were analysed against several parameters, which included age, gender, race, types of cleft pathology, impact and timing of repair surgery.
RESULTS: The patients' age ranged from 1-26 years old. They comprised 30% with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP), 28% with bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP), 28% with isolated cleft palate (ICP) and 14% with isolated cleft lip (ICL). Majority of the patients (68.2%) had normal otoscopic findings. Out of the 346 ears, 241 ears (70%) ears had passed the hearing tests. There was no significant relationship between patients' gender and ethnicity with their hearing status. The types of cleft pathology significantly influenced the outcome of PTA and ABR screening results (p
Methods: Twenty-three participants were recruited for this study. The participants were comprised of 11 Huffaz who memorized 30 chapters of the Islamic Scripture (from the Quran) and 12 non-Huffaz as the control group. All participants had normal hearing perception and underwent an ABR test with and without psychological tasks. The ABR was elicited at 70 dB nHL using a 3000 Hz tone burst stimulus with a 2-0-2 cycle at a stimulus repetition rate of 40 Hz. The ABR wave V amplitude and latencies were measured and statistically compared. A forward digit span test was also conducted to determine participants' working memory capacity.
Results: There were no significant differences in the ABR wave V amplitudes and latencies between Huffaz and non-Huffaz in ABR with and without psychological tasks. There were also no significant differences in the ABR wave V amplitudes and latencies in both groups of ABR with and without psychological tasks. In addition, no significant differences were identified in the digit span working memory score between both groups.
Conclusions: In this study, based on the ABR findings, Huffaz showed the same auditory sensory gating capacity as the non-Huffaz group. The ABR result was consistent with the digit span working memory test score. This finding implies that both groups have similar working memory performance. However, the conclusion is limited to the specific assessment method that we used in this study.
DESIGN: Quasi-experimental and repeated measure study designs were applied in this study. Two different stopping criteria were used, (1) a fixed-signal averaging 4000 sweeps and, (2) a minimum quality indicator of Fmp = 3.1 with a minimum of 800 sweeps.
STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-nine normally hearing adults (18 females, 11 male) participated.
RESULTS: Wave V amplitudes were significantly larger in the LS CE-Chirp® recorded from the vertical montage than the ipsilateral montage. Waves I and III amplitudes were significantly larger from the ipsilateral LS CE-Chirp® than from the other montages and stimulus combinations. The differences in the quality of the ABR recording between the vertical and ipsilateral montages were marginal.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the result suggested that the vertical LS CE-Chirp® ABR had a high potential for a threshold-seeking application, because it produced a higher wave V amplitude. The Ipsilateral LS CE-Chirp® ABR, on the other hand, might also have a high potential for the site of lesion application, because it produced larger waves I and III amplitudes.
Method: Quasi-experimental and repeated-measures study designs were used in this study. Twenty-six adults with normal hearing (17 females, 9 males) participated. ABRs were acquired from the study participants at 3 intensity levels (80, 60, and 40 dB nHL), 3 frequencies (500, 1000, and 2000 Hz), 2 electrode montages (ipsilateral and vertical), and 2 stimuli (NB LS CE-Chirp and tone-burst) using 2 stopping criteria (fixed averages at 4,000 sweeps and F test at multiple points = 3.1).
Results: Wave V amplitudes were only 19%-26% larger for the vertical recordings than the ipsilateral recordings in both the ABRs obtained from the NB LS CE-Chirp and tone-burst stimuli. The mean differences in the F test at multiple points values and the residual noise levels between the ABRs obtained from the vertical and ipsilateral montages were statistically not significant. In addition, the ABR elicited from the NB LS CE-Chirp was significantly larger (up to 69%) than those from the tone-burst, except at the lower intensity level.
Conclusion: Both the ipsilateral and vertical montages can be used to record ABR to the NB LS CE-Chirp because of the small enhancement in the wave V amplitude provided by the vertical montage.