Monaural and binaural phase sensitivity in school-age children with early-childhood otitis media

Shno Koiek*, Christian Brandt, Jesper Hvass Schmidt, Tobias Neher

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

66 Downloads (Pure)


Objective: Previous research has linked recurrent otitis media (OM) during early childhood to reduced binaural masking level differences (BMLDs) in school-age children. How this finding relates to monaural processing abilities and the individual otologic history has not been investigated systematically. The current study, therefore, addressed these issues.

Design: Sensitivity to monaural and binaural phase information was assessed using a common test paradigm. To evaluate the influence of the otologic history, overall OM duration, OM onset age, and the time since the last OM episode were considered in the analyses.

Study sample: Children aged 6–13 years with a history of recurrent OM (N = 42) or without any previous ear diseases (N = 20).

Results: Compared to the controls, the OM children showed smaller BMLDs (p < 0.05) whereas their monaural and binaural detection thresholds were comparable (p > 0.05). After controlling for age, the otologic history factors failed to predict the BMLDs of the OM children. Their monaural detection thresholds were correlated with the binaural detection thresholds (r = ∼0.5, p < 0.05) but not the BMLDs.

Conclusions: The current study suggests that early-childhood OM can impair binaural processing abilities in school-age children.
Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Audiology
Issue number12
Pages (from-to)1054-1061
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2022


  • Psychoacoustics
  • individual differences
  • medical history
  • otitis media
  • paediatrics
  • Otitis Media/diagnosis
  • Humans
  • Child, Preschool


Dive into the research topics of 'Monaural and binaural phase sensitivity in school-age children with early-childhood otitis media'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this