Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 14, 2026
Behavioral Assessment of Hearing in 2 to 4 Year-old Children: A Two-interval, Observer-based Procedure Using Conditioned Play-based Responses
Published on: January 23, 2017
Electrophysiologic threshold study in air and bone conduction in children with 2 months or less age
Insights
Air and bone Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) show agreement for hearing thresholds in infants. However, bone conduction ABR wave V latency is longer than air conduction ABR in normal-hearing newborns.
Area of Science:
- Audiology
- Pediatric audiology
- Neurophysiology
Background:
- Accurate hearing assessment in infants is crucial for early intervention.
- Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) is a key diagnostic tool for infant hearing loss.
- Limited research exists on comparing air and bone conduction ABR in Brazilian neonates.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare air and bone conduction ABR results in infants under two months with normal hearing.
- To evaluate the agreement between air and bone ABR for threshold determination.
- To analyze latency differences between air and bone ABR in neonates.
Main Methods:
- A clinical, transversal cohort study.
- 12 infants (<2 months) with normal hearing screening results were included.
- Air and bone conduction ABR were performed without contralateral masking for bone conduction.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant difference was found in ABR thresholds between air and bone conduction (p>0.05).
- Bone conduction ABR wave V latency was significantly longer than air conduction ABR (p=0.000).
- McNemar and repeated measures ANOVA were used for statistical analysis.
Conclusions:
- Air and bone conduction ABR demonstrate agreement for threshold intensity measurements in neonates.
- Bone conduction ABR exhibits increased wave V latency compared to air conduction.
- Findings support the use of both methods for comprehensive infant hearing evaluation.
Unlabelled:
The differential diagnosis of hearing loss with air and bone Auditory Brainstem Response in small children has not been enough studied in Brazil.
Aim:
To compare air and bone Auditory Brainstem Response results in children under 2 months of age with normal hearing.
Study Design:
clinical with transversal cohort.
Materials And Methods:
12 children who passed the hearing screening were evaluated using air and bone Auditory Brainstem Response. No contralateral masking was used in the bone conduction test. The responses were compared and analyzed by the McNemar test and repetitive measurements of the variance test.
Results:
There were no statistic differences between air and bone conduction Auditory Brainstem Response thresholds (p>0.05). The bone conduction latency for wave V was statistically higher than air conduction latency (p=0.000).
Conclusion:
There was agreement on the results recorded for air and bone conduction Auditory Brainstem Response for threshold intensities; latency for bone conduction wave V was statistically higher than the air conduction latency.
