Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-zlvph Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T15:18:01.074Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A nine-year review of 841 children tested by transtympanic electrocochleography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

Susan Bellman ,
Susanne Barnard  and
H.A. Beagley
Susan Bellman*
Affiliation:
London
Susanne Barnard
Affiliation:
London
H.A. Beagley
Affiliation:
London
*
Hospital for Sick Children, Great Ormond Street, London WC1.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The case notes of 841 subjects who had had ECochG carried out between January 1972 and December 1980, were examined and the results compared with PTA results in 263 cases in which these were available. ECochG was found to be a good predictor of peripheral hearing as long as its limitations were recognized, and some of these are discussed. BSER, which has similar limitations, was also found to be a good predictor of peripheral hearing, although slightly less sensitive, and sometimes gave additional information on the hearing loss and the clinical state of the patient.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 98 , Issue 1 , January 1984 , pp. 1 - 9
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aran, J. M., Charlet de Sauvage, R., Pelerin, J. (1971) Comparaison des seuils electrocochleographique et de l'audiogramme. Etude statistique. Revue de Laryngologie, Otologie et Rhinologie, 92: 477–491.Google Scholar
Aran, J. M. (1978) Contribution of electrocochleography to diagnosis in infancy: An eight year survey. In Early Diagnosis of Hearing Loss. Eds. Gerber, S. E. and Mencher, G. T., pp. 215–238.Google Scholar
Balknay, T. J., Downs, M. P., Jafek, B. W., and Krajicek, M. P. (1979) Hearing loss in Down's syndrome: A treatable handicap more common than realized. Clinical Pediatrics (Philadelphia), 18: 116–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergholtz, L. M., Arlinger, S. D., Kylen, P., and Jerlvall, L. B. (1977) Electrocochleography used as a clinical hearing test in difficult-to-test children. Acta Otolaryngologica, 84: 385–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dahle, A. J., McCollister, F. P., Stagno, S., Reynolds, D. W., and Hoffman, H. E. (1979) Progressive hearing impairment in children with congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 44: 220–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eggermont, J. J., and Odenthal, D. W. (1977) Potentialities of clinical electrocochleography. Clinical Otolaryngology, 2: 275–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hardy, M. P., Haskins, H. L., Hardy, W. G., and Shimizu, H. (1973) Rubella: Audiological evaluation and follow up. Archives of Otolaryngology, 98: 237–245.Google ScholarPubMed
Hooper, R. E., Bergholtz, L. M., and Mehta, D. C. (1977) Electrocochleography: a comparison of action potential and behavioural thresholds. Scandinavian Audiology, 6: 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konigsmark, B. W. (1971) Syndromal approaches to nosology of hereditary deafness. Ear, 7: 2–17.Google Scholar
Ryerson, S., and Beagley, H. A. (1981) Brainstem Electric Responses and Electrocochleography: A comparison of threshold sensitivities in children. British Journal of Audiology, 15: 41–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoshie, N. (1973) Diagnostic significance of the electrocochleogram in clinical audiometry, Audiology, 12: 504–539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed