CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017; 21(04): 347-350
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1599096
Original Research
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

P300: Waves Identification with and without Subtraction of Traces

Ana Carla Leite Romero
Department of Ophthalmology, Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Ribeirão Preto School of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
Department of Phonoaudiology, School of Philosophy and Sciences, Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho, Marilia Campus, Marilia, SP, Brazil
,
Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa Reis
Department of Ophthalmology, Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Ribeirão Preto School of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
,
Anna Caroline Silva de Oliveira
Department of Phonoaudiology, School of Philosophy and Sciences, Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho, Marilia Campus, Marilia, SP, Brazil
,
Humberto de Oliveira Simões
Department of Neuroscience and Behavioral Sceinces, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto School of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
,
Cinthia Amorim de Oliveira Junqueira
Department of Phonoaudiology, Universidade de Sao Paulo Campus de Ribeirao Preto, Ribeirao Preto, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Ana Cláudia Figueiredo Frizzo
Department of Phonoaudiology, School of Philosophy and Sciences, Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho, Marilia Campus, Marilia, SP, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

02 September 2016

21 December 2016

Publication Date:
28 February 2017 (eFirst)

Abstract

Introduction The P300 test requires well-defined and unique criteria, in addition to training for the examiners, for a uniform analysis of studies and to avoid variations and errors in the interpretation of measurement results.

Objectives The objective of this study is to verify whether there are differences in P300 with and without subtraction of traces of standard and nonstandard stimuli.

Method We conducted this study in collaboration with two research electrophysiology laboratories. From Laboratory 1, we selected 40 tests of subjects between 7–44 years, from Laboratory 2, we selected 83 tests of subjects between 18–44 years. We first performed the identification with the nonstandard stimuli; then, we subtracted the nonstandard stimuli from the standard stimuli. The examiners identified the waves, performing a descriptive and comparative analysis of traces with and without subtraction.

Results After a comparative analysis of the traces with and without subtraction, there was no significant difference when compared with analysis of traces in both laboratories, within the conditions, of right ears (p = 0.13 and 0.28 for differences between latency and amplitude measurements) and left ears (p = 0.15 and 0.09 for differences between latency and amplitude measurements) from Laboratory 1. As for Laboratory 2, when investigating both ears, results did not identify significant differences (p = 0.098 and 0.28 for differences between latency and amplitude measurements).

Conclusion There was no difference verified in traces with and without subtraction. We suggest the identification of this potential performed through nonstandard stimuli.