摘要
目的观察健听青年人短音ABR和倍频程CE—Chirp ABR的V波潜伏期和振幅差异,探讨倍频程CE—Chirp ABR的临床应用价值。方法选择听力正常青年人20例,分别行双耳短音ABR和倍频程CE-Chirp ABR测试,记录V波潜伏期和振幅,并用析因设计方法进行统计。结果在20、40、60、80dB nHL刺激强度下,倍频程CE-Chirp ABR的V波潜伏期明显缩短,与短音ABR相比具有统计学差异(P〈0.05);在20、40、60dB nHL刺激强度下,倍频程CE-Chirp ABR的V波振幅明显高于短音ABR,差异具有统计学意义(P〈0.05),而在80dB nHL刺激强度下两者V波振幅无统计学差异(P〉0.05)。结论听力正常青年人倍频程CE-Chirp ABRV波潜伏期短于短音ABR,且倍频程CE-Chirp ABR中低刺激强度下V波振幅明显高于短音ABR,更有利于V波判断,但其V波潜伏期的规律性较短音ABR差,在不同个体间差异较大。
Obloctivo To compare the difference in wave V latencies and amplitudes between tone-pip ABR and octave band CE-Cbirp~ ABR in normal-hearing young people and to investigate the clinical value of octave band CE-Chirp ABR. Methods Twenty young adults with normal hearing received tone-pip ABR and octave band CE-Chirp ABR tests. The wave V latencies and amplitudes were recorded and the factorial design methods were used to analyze the data. Results Wave V latencies of octave band CE-Chirp ABR were significantly shorter than those of tone-pip ABR(P〈0.05) at 20,40,60 and 80 dB nHL of stimulus.The wave V amplitudes of octave band CE-Chirp ABR were greater than those of tone-pip ABR (P〈0.01) at low and moderate intensity(20, 40, 60 dB nHL), but there was no significant difference at high intensity (80 dB nHL)(P〉0.05). Conclusion In normal-hearing young people, the wave V latencies of octave band CE-Chirp ABR are shorter than tone-pip ABR, and octave band CE-Chirp ABR is more helpful for clinical judgment of wave V at low and moderate intensity level. However, the changes of wave V latencies of octave band CE-Chirp is more irregular and shows greater individual differences than ABR.
出处
《中国听力语言康复科学杂志》
2015年第4期252-256,共5页
Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation