Response to Sauter (2007)

Roanne K. Karzon; Judith E.C. Lieu

doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2007/008)

Response to Sauter (2007)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Purpose: To respond to the companion letter by T. B. Sauter (2007) commenting on "Initial Audiologic Assessment of Infants Referred From Well Baby, Special Care, and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Nurseries" by R. K. Karzon and J. E. C. Lieu (2006). Method: Sauter states that he is in agreement with the article by Karzon and Lieu with respect to the 2-hr time for the initial diagnostic appointment and the reliance on auditory brainstem response (ABR) as the primary method for threshold estimation in young infants. However, he questions the order of test stimuli within the ABR protocol and the order of tests within the test battery. Our comments reflect the clinical experience of the authors and are supported by evidence from the literature. Conclusions: Development of a protocol for the initial evaluation of infants referred from newborn screening poses diagnostic challenges. A 2-hr appointment with a battery of tests works well with this population.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	77-78
Number of pages	2
Journal	American Journal of Audiology
Volume	16
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1044/1059-0889(2007/008)
State	Published - Jun 2007

Keywords

Auditory brainstem response
Hearing loss
Initial assessment

Access to Document

10.1044/1059-0889(2007/008)

Cite this

@article{953658c87db8462b92ab1095c55c1934,

title = "Response to Sauter (2007)",

abstract = "Purpose: To respond to the companion letter by T. B. Sauter (2007) commenting on {"}Initial Audiologic Assessment of Infants Referred From Well Baby, Special Care, and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Nurseries{"} by R. K. Karzon and J. E. C. Lieu (2006). Method: Sauter states that he is in agreement with the article by Karzon and Lieu with respect to the 2-hr time for the initial diagnostic appointment and the reliance on auditory brainstem response (ABR) as the primary method for threshold estimation in young infants. However, he questions the order of test stimuli within the ABR protocol and the order of tests within the test battery. Our comments reflect the clinical experience of the authors and are supported by evidence from the literature. Conclusions: Development of a protocol for the initial evaluation of infants referred from newborn screening poses diagnostic challenges. A 2-hr appointment with a battery of tests works well with this population.",

keywords = "Auditory brainstem response, Hearing loss, Initial assessment",

author = "Karzon, {Roanne K.} and Lieu, {Judith E.C.}",

year = "2007",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1044/1059-0889(2007/008)",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "77--78",

journal = "American Journal of Audiology",

issn = "1059-0889",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response to Sauter (2007)

AU - Karzon, Roanne K.

AU - Lieu, Judith E.C.

PY - 2007/6

Y1 - 2007/6

N2 - Purpose: To respond to the companion letter by T. B. Sauter (2007) commenting on "Initial Audiologic Assessment of Infants Referred From Well Baby, Special Care, and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Nurseries" by R. K. Karzon and J. E. C. Lieu (2006). Method: Sauter states that he is in agreement with the article by Karzon and Lieu with respect to the 2-hr time for the initial diagnostic appointment and the reliance on auditory brainstem response (ABR) as the primary method for threshold estimation in young infants. However, he questions the order of test stimuli within the ABR protocol and the order of tests within the test battery. Our comments reflect the clinical experience of the authors and are supported by evidence from the literature. Conclusions: Development of a protocol for the initial evaluation of infants referred from newborn screening poses diagnostic challenges. A 2-hr appointment with a battery of tests works well with this population.

AB - Purpose: To respond to the companion letter by T. B. Sauter (2007) commenting on "Initial Audiologic Assessment of Infants Referred From Well Baby, Special Care, and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Nurseries" by R. K. Karzon and J. E. C. Lieu (2006). Method: Sauter states that he is in agreement with the article by Karzon and Lieu with respect to the 2-hr time for the initial diagnostic appointment and the reliance on auditory brainstem response (ABR) as the primary method for threshold estimation in young infants. However, he questions the order of test stimuli within the ABR protocol and the order of tests within the test battery. Our comments reflect the clinical experience of the authors and are supported by evidence from the literature. Conclusions: Development of a protocol for the initial evaluation of infants referred from newborn screening poses diagnostic challenges. A 2-hr appointment with a battery of tests works well with this population.

KW - Auditory brainstem response

KW - Hearing loss

KW - Initial assessment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=39149120218&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1044/1059-0889(2007/008)

DO - 10.1044/1059-0889(2007/008)

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:39149120218

SN - 1059-0889

VL - 16

SP - 77

EP - 78

JO - American Journal of Audiology

JF - American Journal of Audiology

IS - 1

ER -

Response to Sauter (2007)

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this