PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H Rosenhamer

Publications and source records attributed to H Rosenhamer.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1983

Will contralateral white noise interfere with the monaurally click-evoked brainstem response?

Monaurally evoked (and ipsilaterally recorded) ABRs to clicks at 70 dB nHL in the presence of contralateral masking by white noise at 60, 70, 80 and 90 dB HL were compared with the corresponding ABRs without contralateral masking. The investigation was performed in 11 normal, young female subjects. There were no differences concerning wave shape and relative amplitudes, except slight changes in one subject. The following latency findings concern group statistics. The latency of wave I did not change significantly with contralateral noise at any one of the four levels. The latency of wave III was significantly prolonged only at the noise level of 90 dB HL. The latency of wave V was significantly increased at the noise levels of 80 and 90 dB HL. The average latency prolongations were on the order of 0.05 ms. The findings suggest the latency increments to be attributable to central masking rather than to acoustic crossover or stapedius reflex elicitation. Contralateral white noise levels below 80 dB HL would not seem to affect the ABR to clicks above 65 dB nHL.

Adult↗
PubMed1982

Bilaterally recorded auditory brainstem responses to monaural stimulation. Latency and amplitude differences in normal subjects.

Ipsilaterally and contralaterally (forehead-mastoid) recorded ABRs to monaurally administered clicks at 90 dB nHL were compared in 16 young normal-hearing female subjects (32 ears). The comparisons were made with regard to latencies and amplitudes of waves I, III and V, and the results concern group statistics. Wave I was recordable in the contralateral derivation in less than 50% of the cases. The amplitudes of waves I and III were significantly smaller, and the latency of wave III significantly shorter (by an average of 0.15 ms) in the contralaterally recorded ABR. There was a tendency for wave V to diminish and to lag in the contralateral recording; however, there were no statistically significant differences in wave V amplitude and latency between the two sides. Nor was there found to be any significant variability differences concerning wave III and wave V latencies between the two derivations. The dominance of the wave V peak-to-peak amplitude was established in both recordings. Two concluding computations showed that there were no differences between right and left ear stimulation, and no differences between recordings performed with the ground electrode applied to the nasion or to the sternum.

Adult↗