Differences and similarities in the long-latency auditory evoked potential recording of P1-N1 for different sound stimuli

AUTOR(ES)

Lunardelo, Pamela Papile

FONTE

Rev. CEFAC

DATA DE PUBLICAÇÃO

15/08/2019

RESUMO

RESUMO Objetivo: caracterizar as similaridades e diferenças do registro das componentes P1 e N1 para os estímulos verbal e não verbal, em uma população adulta, para fins de referência. Métodos: foram estudados 21 sujeitos adultos jovens, eutróficos, de ambos os sexos. O potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência foi pesquisado com estimulação bilateral e registro simultâneo das duas orelhas, com o estímulo clique e a sílaba /da/. Resultados: a N1 foi identificada em 100,0% da população, para os estímulos clique e fala, enquanto que a P1 foi observada em 85,7% e 95,2% dos sujeitos, para os respectivos estímulos. Foram observadas diferenças significantes para a amplitude de P1 e N1 entre as orelhas (p <0.05), sendo na P1 os valores da esquerda superiores à direita e para N1 foi o inverso. Entre os estímulos os valores de amplitude e latência da N1 foram maiores para a fala, enquanto na P1, apenas a latência obteve resultados distintos. Conclusão: a componente N1 foi a mais frequente. Apenas para N1 a diferença entre os tipos de estímulos ocorreram para latência e amplitude, o que pode ser justificado pelo seu papel no processo da discriminação de fala.ABSTRACT Purpose: this study aimed at illustrating the similarities and differences in the recording of components P1 and N1 for verbal and non-verbal stimuli, in an adult sample population, for reference purposes. Methods: twenty-one adult, eutrophic individuals of both sexes were recruited for this study. The long-latency auditory evoked potential was detected by bilateral stimulation in both ears, using simultaneous recording, with non-verbal stimuli and the syllable /da/. Results: for non-verbal and speech stimuli, N1 was identified in 100.0% of the participants, whereas P1 was observed in 85.7% and 95.2% individuals for non-verbal and speech stimuli, respectively. Significant differences were observed for the P1 and N1 amplitudes between the ears (p <0.05); the P1 component, in the left ear, was higher than that in the right ear, whereas the N1 component was higher in the right one. Regarding the stimuli, the amplitude and latency values of N1 were higher for speech, whereas in P1, different results were obtained only in latency. Conclusion: the N1 component was the most frequently detected one. Differences in latency and amplitude for each stimuli occurred only for N1, which can be justified by its role in the process of speech discrimination.

Documentos Relacionados

• The Application of P300-Long-Latency Auditory-Evoked Potential in Parkinson Disease
• Long-term Effects of Unilateral and Bilateral Otitis Media and Myringotomy on Long-Latency Verbal and Non-Verbal Auditory-Evoked Potentials
• Cognitive Auditory Evoked Potential in children with speech sound disorders: analysis of different verbal stimuli
• Different mechanisms underlie the long-latency stretch reflex response of active human muscle at different joints.
• Reliability and efficacy of the long-latency stretch reflex in the human thumb.