title: Testing time comparison between two procedures with new technologies of Automated Auditory Brainstem Response (AABR).
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the testing time of two Automated Auditory Brainstem Response (AABR) procedures using different repetition rates and detection modes.
  
  
  METHODS
  A hearing screening using AABR was performed in 30 newborns with mean age of 21 days. Each newborn was submitted to two hearing screening procedures using different AABR equipments (Procedure 1 and Procedure 2). Procedure 1 used a repetition rate of 53 Hz and the one-sample test for response detection; Procedure 2 used a repetition rate of 90 Hz, and the q-sample test for response detection. The ABR with click stimulus was then registered as gold standard test, and the responses were analyzed by a trained audiologist.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The mean time observed for Procedure 1 considering both ears was 84.8 (±53.5) seconds; for Procedure 2 the mean time was 27.9 (±20.0) seconds. The testing time of the first procedure was three times longer than the second one. Statistical analysis showed significant difference between the testing times of the procedures.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The q-sample test and the repetition rate of 90 Hz used in the AABR equipment showed earlier response detection.
authors.forename: Taise Argolo
authors.initials: TA
authors.lastname: Sena
authors.forename: Natália
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Ramos
authors.forename: Gabriela Ribeiro Ivo
authors.initials: GR
authors.lastname: Rodrigues
authors.forename: Doris Ruthi
authors.initials: DR
authors.lastname: Lewis
mesh_terms: D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D016057:Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem; D006311:Hearing Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis*; D006320:Hearing Tests / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D015997:Neonatal Screening / Q000379:methods*; D013997:Time Factors