Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objectives To determine the correlation between hearing thresholds obtained using free-field Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials (CAEPs) and behavioral audiometry in children with sensorineural hearing loss after hearing-aids or cochlear-implant intervention, and to determine whether P1 latency and N1-P1 inter-peak amplitude can be used to assess hearing device outcome in young children. Methods Thirty-three children (2–14 years) with mild-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss were divided into a cochlear-implant group (22-ears) and a hearing-aid group (27-ears). Tone burst stimuli at 0.5-, 1-, 2-, and 4-kHz were used to evoke CAEPs and behavioral audiometry thresholds in a free field. The CAEP P1 latency and N1-P1 inter-peak amplitude were recorded. Results Free-field tone-burst CAEP P1 response thresholds were positively correlated with free-field behavioral audiometry thresholds at 0.5-, 1-, 2-, and 4-kHz in both the hearing-aid group (Pearson correlation coefficients: 0.567, 0.670, 0.637, and 0.762, respectively, p < 0.01) and the cochlear-implant group (0.825, 0.662, 0.538, and 0.567 respectively). At the tested frequencies, the mean differences between the 2 testing methods were 5–8 dB in the cochlear-implants group and 1–6 dB in the hearing-aid group. In both groups, the CAEP P1 latencies were 130–150 ms, and the N1-P1 inter-peak amplitudes were 6 μV. Conclusions When evaluating the efficiency of hearing interventions in clinical settings, free-field CAEP testing using tone-burst stimuli may serve as a clinically useful supplementary tool for pediatric patients who have difficulty cooperating with behavioral audiometry, provided its limitations are taken into account. Level of evidence This study is a diagnostic study providing Level 2b evidence. The results demonstrate a significant correlation between CAEP and behavioral hearing thresholds in children using hearing devices, supporting its potential applicable value as an objective clinical assessment tool.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ruan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: