Influencia da taxa de repetição do estimulo clique na latência e amplitude do potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico

• Autor(a) principal: Bento, Daniela Veronese
• Data de Publicação: 2012
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP
• Texto Completo: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/11921
• topic: Potencial evocado auditivo; Audição; Diagnóstico; Adulto; Recém-nascido; Prematuros; Auditory brainstem response; Hearing; Diagnosis; Adult; Newborn; Premature; CNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::FONOAUDIOLOGIA

INTRPDUCTION: Many different rates for ABR can be used to sensitize the exam. However, due to possible differences that can occur in the latencies and amplitudes when using ABR, it is necessary to carry out research to support the audiological diagnosis and help the clinical decision-making process. AIM: To study the influences at the two different repetition stimulus rates in the ABR in adults, neonates and premature infants. METHOD: ten normal-hearing neonates (GI), adults (GII) and premature infants (GIII) were subjected to ABR registration by air with repetition rates from 27.7 to 61.1 clicks per second (intensities: 80, 60, 40 and 20 dBHL). RESULTS: The arithmetic means and medians showed adjacent values for each combination of repetition rate and groups, which suggests that the distribution of the variables shows symmetry. Nevertheless, at 80 dBHL, the repetition rate of 61.1 clicks per second attained an absolute latency in waves I, II and V augmented in the groups GI and GIII (P=0.003, P=0* and P=0, respectively) and the amplitude in waves III and V reduced in the GI and GII (P=0.014 and P=0*). Wave III had the most reduced amplitude with a rarefied polarity (P=0.014). Moreover, the latency time during interpeak intervals I-III were higher for GI and GIII (P=0.0035); during III-V were higher for GIII (P=0*) and during I-V were higher for GI (P=0*). At 60 dBHL, the latency was higher for GI and GIII, -at 61.1 clicks per second in the three groups (P=0+)-, and the amplitude was more reduced for GI and GII (P=0,001). At 40 dBHL, two repetition rates attained a higher latency and reduced amplitude for GI and GII (P=0,005 and P=0,001, respectively); however, the three groups presented a higher latency time at 61.1 clicks per second (P=0,005). At 20 dBHL, the latency was higher for GII and GIII - 61.1 clicks per second (p=0,020)-, and the amplitude was smaller for GI and GIII (P=0,002). The exam length was higher - 27.7 click per second (P=0*)- in the three groups. CONCLUSION: Despite the latency increase and amplitude reduction, the method of raising the repetition rate of the acoustic stimuli to register electrophysiological hearing responses can be incorporated to sensitize the exam and decrease its duration