Medical Devices: Evidence and Research (Jul 2021)
Bone Conduction Stimulated VEMP Using the B250 Transducer
Abstract
Karl-Johan Fredén Jansson,1 Bo Håkansson,1 Sabine Reinfeldt,1 Ann-Charlotte Persson,2 Måns Eeg-Olofsson2 1Department of Electrical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden; 2Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenCorrespondence: Karl-Johan Fredén JanssonDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, 41296, SwedenTel +46 31 772 1783Email [email protected]: Bone conduction (BC) stimulation is rarely used for clinical testing of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs) due to the limitations of conventional stimulation alternatives. The aim of this study is to compare VEMP using the new B250 transducer with the Minishaker and air conduction (AC) stimulation.Methods: Thirty normal subjects between 20 and 37 years old and equal gender distribution were recruited, 15 for ocular VEMP and 15 for cervical VEMP. Four stimulation conditions were compared: B250 on the mastoid (FM); Minishaker and B250 on the forehead (FZ); and AC stimulation using an insert earphone.Results: It was found that B250 at FM required a statistically significant lower hearing level than with AC stimulation, in average 41 dB and 35 dB lower for ocular VEMP and cervical VEMP, respectively, but gave longer n10 (1.1 ms) and n23 (1.6 ms). No statistical difference was found between B250 at FM and Minishaker at FZ.Conclusion: VEMP stimulated with B250 at FM gave similar response as the Minishaker at FZ and for a much lower hearing level than AC stimulation using insert earphones.Keywords: bone conduction, vestibular evoked myogenic potential, B250
