Otoacoustic emissions as an indicator of hearing loss


  • Mark E. Lutman Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
  • Amanda J. Hall Centre for Hearing and Balance Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TN, UK


Otoacoustic emissions (OAE) are generated as a by-product of the nonlinear cochlear ampli cation process involving the electro-motile properties of the outer hair cells. Most sensorineural hearing losses arise predominantly from reduced cochlear amplification and hence are associated with reduced or absent OAEs. This means that OAE amplitude is a potential indicator of sensorineural hearing loss. However, there is substantial variation in OAE characteristics between individuals with similar hearing threshold, which limits their ability to predict hearing threshold levels (HTL) absolutely. Nonetheless, OAEs are stable within individuals and offer the possibility to predict changes in HTL from changes in OAE amplitude. Prediction of changes in HTL requires knowledge of the relationship between OAE amplitude and HTL as well as the test-retest reliability of OAEs. These parameters were established for a range of transiently evoked and distortion product OAE measures (TEOAE and DPOAE) by testing 43 subjects with HTL across a range from normal hearing to mild hearing loss. Results suggested that TEOAE elicited by a maximum length sequence approach would be most sen- sitive to changes in HTL, having the largest change in amplitude relative to the test-retest reliability. These ideas were further explored by monitoring auditory function in 17 normal hearing subjects over 7 days in whom a reversible hear- ing loss was induced by administering aspirin at maximum therapeutic dose. Further ongoing research is evaluating the potential of TEOAEs for monitor- ing auditory function in people exposed to noise at work. More than 200 new recruits to noisy industry and non-exposed controls have had TEOAEs measured over a 3-year interval to examine whether OAEs are a more sensitive indicator of noise-induced hearing disorder than conventional pure tone audiometry. Preliminary conclusions suggest that OAEs provide a useful physiological correlate of hearing impairment when used in the context of longitudinal monitoring.


Beck, A., Maurer, J., Welkoborsky, J., and Mann, W. (1992) “Changes in transitory evoked otoacoustic emissions in chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5FU,” HNO 40, 123-127.

Beattie, R. C., Kenworthy, O. T. and Luna, C. A. (2003). “Immediate and short term reliability of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions,” Int. J. Audiol., 42, 348-354.

Bonfils, P., Piron, J-P., Uziel, A., and Pujol, R. (1988). “A correlative study of evoked otoacoustic emission properties and audiometric thresholds,” Arch. Otolaryngol., 245, 53-56.

Cazals, Y. (2000). “Auditory sensori-neural alterations induced by salicylate,” Progr. Neurobiol., 62, 583–631.

Engdahl, B., Woxen, O., Arnesen, A.R., and Mair, I.W.S. (1996). “Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions as screening for hearing losses at the school for military training,” Scand. Audiol., 25, 71-78.

Gorga, M. P., Neely, S. T., Bergman, B. M., Beauchaine, K. L., Kaminski, J. R, Peters, J., Schulte, L., and Jesteadt, W. (1993). “A comparison of transient-evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 94, 2639-2648.

Hall, A. J. (2005). “Otoacoustic Emissions and Hearing Threshold,” PhD Thesis, Uni- versity of Southampton.

Hotz, M. A., Probst, R., Harris, F. R., and Hauser, R. (1993). “Monitoring the effects of noise exposure using transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions,” Acta otolaryngol., 113, 478-482.

Kapadia, S., and Lutman, M.E. (1997). “Are normal thresholds a sufficient condition for click evoked otoacoustic emissions?,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 101, 3566-3576.

McFadden, D., and Plattsmier, H.S. (1984). “Aspirin abolishes spontaneous otoacoustic emissions,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 76, 443–448.

Marshall, L., and Heller, L.M. (1996). “Reliability of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions,” Ear Hear., 17, 237-254.

Prieve, B. A., Gorga, M. P., Schmidt, A., Neely, S., Peters, J., Schultes, L. and Jesteadt, W. (1993). “Analysis of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired ears,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 93, 3308-3319.

Probst, R, Lonsbury-Martin B.L., and Martin, G.K. (1991). “ A review of otoacoustic emissions,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 89, 2027-2067.

Shera, C.A., and Guinan, J.J. (1999). “Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 105, 782–798.

Sockalingham, R., Key, J., and Ho, C.D. (2007). “Test-retest reliability of distortion- product otoacoustic emissions in children with normal hearing: A preliminary study,” Int. J. Audiol., 46, 351-354.

Thornton, A. R. D. (1993). “High rate otoacoustic emissions,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 94, 132-136.

Additional Files



How to Cite

Lutman, M. E., & Hall, A. J. (2007). Otoacoustic emissions as an indicator of hearing loss. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 1, 147–158. Retrieved from http://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2007-15



2007/2. Physiological correlates of auditory functions