Filtered Speech Test Research Articles

A Digital Filter-Based Method for Diagnosing Speech Comprehension Deficits.

ObjectiveTo improve the diagnostic efficiency of current tests for auditory processing disorders (APDs) by creating new test signals using digital filtering methods.MethodsWe conducted a prospective study from August 1, 2014, to August 31, 2019, using 3 low speech redundancy tests with novel test signals that we created with specially designed digital filters: the binaural resynthesis test and the low pass and high pass filtered speech tests. We validated and optimized these new tests, then applied them to healthy individuals across different age groups to examine how age affected performance and to children with APD before and after acoustically controlled auditory training (ACAT) to assess clinical improvement after treatment.ResultsWe found a progressive increase in performance accuracy with less restrictive filters (P<.001) and with increasing age for all tests (P<.001). Our results suggest that binaural resynthesis and auditory closure mature at similar rates. We also demonstrate that the new tests can be used for the diagnosis of APD and for the monitoring of ACAT effects. Interestingly, we found that patients having the most severe deficits also benefited the most from ACAT (P<.001).ConclusionWe introduce a method that substantially improves current diagnostic tools for APD. In addition, we provide information on auditory processing maturation in normal development and validate that our method can detect APD-related deficits and ACAT-induced improvements in auditory processing.

Auditory training app validation

Abstract Introduction One of the main hearing complaints is the difficulty to perceive speech in noisy environments. This complaint gets worse with ageing at which cognitive processing speed slows and/or when hearing loss is present. An auditory training can improve speech perception in adverse environments. The use of auditory training software on various digital platforms is becoming a reality. Objectives To validate the auditory training app in European Portuguese with individuals aged between 55 and 64 years old with an approximate average of 20dB of hearing thresholds. Methodology The sample consists in two groups of seven individuals without cognitive problems. One of the groups performed eight auditory training sessions with the application for a period of four weeks and the other group (the control group) did not perform any auditory training session. The evaluation was made in all the individuals with the filtered speech test. The training group was evaluated before, immediately after and after four weeks of the auditory training sessions and the control group was evaluated after four weeks. Results Statistically there is a significant difference between before and immediately after the auditory training in the filtered speech test (p = 0.018). Four weeks after the end of the training the performance of each individual was the same. In the control group there were no significant differences between the two evaluation moments. Conclusion The EVOLLU auditory training app promotes an improvement in the perception of the word in adverse environments that continues even after some time. This is a sign that individuals are applying that learning into their day to day living. The Evollu application can and should be used in the auditory training of individuals aged between 55 to 64 years old.

The Filtered Words Test and the Influence of Lexicality

In the present study, the authors aimed to investigate the language confounds of filtered words tests by examining the repetition of real words versus nonsense words as a function of level of filtering. Fifty-five young, native-English-speaking women with normal hearing were required to repeat 80 real-word and 80 nonsense-word monosyllables that were matched for phonemic content and low-pass filtered. Thirty participants were tested using a harsher filter range of 2000 to 500 Hz, and 25 participants were tested using a milder filter range of 3000 to 1500 Hz. Paired-sample t tests compared accuracy (percentage of phonemes correct) for word and nonsense-word stimuli at each filter level. At filter levels between 3000 and 1750 Hz, performance for word stimuli was significantly better than for nonsense-word stimuli. Conversely, at filter levels between 500 and 1250 Hz, performance was significantly better for nonsense words. The linguistic content of real-word stimuli benefits performance on low-pass filtered speech tests at filter levels above 1500 Hz. Caution must be taken when using real-word stimuli in low-pass filtered speech tests as part of an auditory processing diagnostic test battery, because language ability will impact on performance.

Central auditory processing functions in learning disabled children assessed by behavioural tests

Background: There is a high prevalence of central auditory processing disorders (CAPD) in children diagnosed with learning disability (LD). It is important to identify any deficits early in order to determine appropriate management. Objective: To assess central auditory processing functions in children with LD through behavioural testing. Study design: The present study comprised 60 normal hearing children of both genders. Cases included 30 children with LD, and the controls included 30 healthy children. Each group was further subdivided into three equal number subgroups according to age: 6–8 years, > 8–10 years and > 10–12 years. All subjects were submitted to full history taking, otological examination, basic audiological evaluation and central auditory processing testing which included: low pass filtered speech test, speech-in-noise test, dichotic digit test, pitch pattern sequence test, auditory fusion test and memory tests. Results: This study showed that the prevalence of CAPD in children with LD was 80%, with relatively more than soft CAPD criteria used. There were statistically significant differences between cases and controls regarding the central tests included in this study, except the LPF test and, in the youngest subgroup, the SPIN test. Age significantly affected psychophysical testing, and right ear advantage was found in our subjects. However, gender had no effect on testing. Conclusion: Central auditory processing functions were significantly affected in children with LD compared to controls.

Is It CAPD or ADHD?

Is It CAPD or ADHD?

Assessment of auditory processing disorder in children using an adaptive filtered speech test

Objective: One type of test commonly used to assess auditory processing disorder (APD) is the ‘filtered words test’ (FWT), in which a monaural, low-redundancy speech sample is distorted by using filtering to modify its frequency content. One limitation of the various existing FWTs is that they are performed using a constant level of low-pass filtering, making them prone to ceiling and floor effects that compromise their efficiency and accuracy. A recently developed computer-based test, the University of Canterbury Adaptive Speech Test- Filtered Words (UCAST-FW), uses an adaptive procedure intended to improve the efficiency and sensitivity of the test over its constant-level counterparts. Design: The UCAST-FW was administered to school-aged children to investigate the ability of the test to distinguish between children with and without APD. Study sample: Fifteen children aged 7–13 diagnosed with APD, and an aged-matched control group of 10 children with no history of listening difficulties. Results: Data obtained demonstrates a significant difference between the UCAST-FW results obtained by children with APD and those with normal auditory processing. Conclusions: These findings provide evidence that the UCAST-FW may discriminate between children with and without APD with greater sensitivity than its constant-level counterparts.

Billing Edits for Auditory Processing Disorder In Effect April 1, 2012

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderBottom Line1 Apr 2012Billing Edits for Auditory Processing Disorder In Effect April 1, 2012 Lisa SatterfieldMS, CCC-A Lisa Satterfield Google Scholar More articles by this author , MS, CCC-A https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.BML.17052012.3 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In As of April 1, 2012, audiologists may not bill certain codes together for the evaluation of (central) auditory processing disorder [(C)APD] for the same Medicare- or Medicaid-eligible patient on the same day. The restrictions are contained in the 2012 National Correct Coding Initiative (NCCI) edits. NCCI edits prohibit billing certain procedure codes on the same day and are intended to promote correct coding methods and to control improper coding leading to inappropriate payment. They are mandatory for Medicare and Medicaid services but optional for private health plans. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) develops the NCCI edits based on definitions in the CPT (Current Procedural Terminology, © American Medical Association) manual, national and local policies, standard clinical practice, and current coding practices. Evaluation and Individual Tests Many audiologists administer and bill for (C)APD evaluations and individual tests because of an elaborate history surrounding the codes. In 2005, CMS approved two new (C)APD evaluation codes. It took nearly two years of ASHA advocacy to receive approval for the codes: CPT 92620 (evaluation of central auditory function, with report; initial 60 minutes) and CPT 92621 (each additional 15 minutes). When the codes did receive approval, however, they were undervalued by CMS. Clinicians responded to the low values by requesting that they be allowed to bill the individual test codes—specifically the filtered speech test (92571), staggered spondaic word test (92572), and synthetic sentence identification test (92576), in addition to the timed central auditory function codes. CMS, however, recommended that 92620 and 92621 not be billed in combination with 92571, 92572, or 92576. CMS indicated that the individual tests could be reported only if they are performed in isolation, using the single code representing that procedure. If a battery of tests is performed, the individual tests should not be billed in addition to 92620/92621. CMS reasoned that using the time-valued codes (92620 and 92621) allows the audiologist to capture the time spent on the evaluation for site of lesion and other tests of central auditory function often used to determine the presence of (C)APD. Additionally, billing 92620 and 92621 avoids the suggestion that the three individual tests are required as part of the test battery to evaluate central auditory function, and instead allows the audiologist to determine the tests most appropriate for the patient. Unanticipated Action It was anticipated that NCCI would apply this soon after the CPT codes were published in 2005. The initial NCCI edit, however, did not prohibit billing the individual test codes with 92620 and 92621. Instead, it restricted billing 92506 (evaluation of speech, language, voice, communication, and/or auditory processing) with 92620 and 92621. This edit remains in effect. Seven years later, NCCI is enforcing the edit that prohibits billing individual test codes with the timed codes. Therefore, as of April 1, billing 92620/92621 with 92571, 92572, or 92576 on the same day for Medicare or Medicaid patients is no longer allowed. For updates and additional edits, visit ASHA’s reimbursement webpage. Author Notes Lisa Satterfield, MS, CCC-A, director of health care regulatory advocacy, can be reached at [email protected]. Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 17Issue 5April 2012 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Apr 1, 2012 Metrics Downloaded 99 times Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagleader-topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2012 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

Development of an adaptive low-pass filtered speech test for the identification of auditory processing disorders

ObjectiveOne type of test commonly used to examine auditory processing disorders (APD) is the low-pass filtered speech test (LPFST), of which there are various versions. In LPFSTs, a monaural, low-redundancy speech sample is distorted by using filtering to modify its frequency content. Due to the richness of the neural pathways in the auditory system and the redundancy of acoustic information in spoken language, a normal listener is able to recognize speech even when parts of the signal are missing, whereas this ability is often impaired in listeners with APD. One limitation of the various versions of the LPFST is that they are carried out using a constant level of low-pass filtering (e.g. a fixed 1kHz corner frequency) which makes them prone to ceiling and floor effects. The purpose of this study was to counter these effects by modifying the LPFST using a computer-based adaptive procedure, and to evaluate the performance of normal-hearing participants of varying ages on the test. MethodsIn this preliminary study, 33 adults and 30 children (aged 8–11 years) with no known history of listening difficulties were tested. The University of Canterbury Adaptive Speech Test (UCAST) platform was used to administer a four-alternative forced-choice adaptive test that altered a low-pass filter (LPF) to track the corner frequency at which participants correctly identified a certain percentage of the word stimuli. ResultsFindings on the University of Canterbury Adaptive Speech Test-Filtered Words (UCAST-FW) indicated a significant maturational effect. Adult participants performed significantly better on the UCAST-FW in comparison to the child participants. The UCAST-FW test was reliable over repeated administrations. ConclusionsAn adaptive low-pass filtered speech test such as the UCAST-FW is sensitive to maturational changes in auditory processing ability.

Processamento auditivo na perda auditiva unilateral: relato de caso

Unilateral hearing loss represents great risk to academic backwardness, communication, social development, and also to auditory processing. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the auditory abilities of localization, closing, figure-ground, temporal resolution, and simple temporal ordering in a male 17-year-old individual diagnosed with profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss of idiopathic etiology, without other alterations. The evaluation process consisted on the application of a checklist, and the conduction of conventional clinical audiological evaluation (pure-tone audiometry, logoaudiometry, and tympanometry), and of monotic (ipsilateral SSI, Filtered speech test) and diotic (Sound localization, Auditory memory for verbal and non-verbal sounds, AFT-R) auditory processing test. Results showed alteration only in the sound localization test. No complaints were reported regarding the abilities of sound localization, attention, discrimination, and comprehension. In this case study, the profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss did not seem to restrict the development of the auditory processing abilities evaluated, except for the localization of the sound source.

A Filtered Speech Test to Better Evaluate Electric Acoustic Stimulation (EAS) Candidacy

Electric Acoustic Stimulation (EAS) is a new treatment option for partial deafness. Most of these patients are unable to use their high frequencies acoustically. Turner (2006) showed that high-frequency amplification was efficient only if the hearing loss is less than 60–80 dB HL. He suggested use of a filtered speech test when the clinician doubts the effectiveness of amplification. Despite hearing preservation, some EAS patients may not have improvement of speech understanding with the combination of electric and acoustic stimulation compared to the implant alone. For patients with high-frequency hearing loss, this study evaluated the intelligibility provided by the residual low frequencies in order to predict if a patient is a good EAS candidate.

Auditory Processing Disorder Evaluation: Using a Reinforcement Paradigm

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderFeature1 Nov 2007Auditory Processing Disorder Evaluation: Using a Reinforcement Paradigm Raymond M. Hurley Raymond M. Hurley Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.FTR1.12152007.5 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Many issues associated with auditory processing disorders (APDs) have been debated and researched. For the most part, however, the issue of testee motivation/reinforcement has been ignored except for an article by Silman and colleagues (2000) that demonstrated changes in APD test performance through the use of reinforcement. During the last two years, I was asked to consult on the APD evaluation of two boys, ages 10 and 11. Each of these children had been diagnosed with a reading disorder, but had normal speech and language. The children’s school system tested them for an APD with positive results. The testers’ comments suggested poor motivation on the part of the two boys in performing the APD tests. The motivation issue was also noted in the teachers’ comments, which characterized each child as not highly motivated. Recalling the article by Silman et al. (2000), I consulted with both sets of parents about the motivation issue and suggested that the two boys be retested using a reinforcement paradigm; the parents agreed. During discussion with the parents, I asked about suitable reinforcement. By coincidence, both sets of parents said their sons were highly motivated to save money—one wanted to purchase a new skateboard and the other wanted to purchase upgrades for his BMX bicycle. Further, the parents volunteered to provide the reinforcement money. The re-testing was conducted three to four weeks after the original testing, using the Filtered Speech Test (FST), the Dichotic Digits Test (DDT), and the Pitch Pattern Test (PPT), whose performance characteristics and norms I had previously investigated (Singer, Hurley & Preece, 1998). Each boy was told that he would receive 25 cents for each correct response. The results of these tests are presented in Figure 1, which compares the initial evaluation performance to the re-evaluation performance obtained using reinforcement. The test scores depicted in Figure 1 are composite scores, representing the average of the right and left ear scores, as the individual ear scores for each test were symmetrical. Each boy demonstrated enough improvement in each of the three APD tests using a reinforcement paradigm to move his performance from below normal to normal. These results suggest that the original test may have been influenced by these children’s low motivation. If these children truly had an APD, their performance should not have moved from below normal to normal with increased motivation, i.e., reinforcement. Arguably, the improved test performance may have been the result of a learning effect; however, the time between testing was three to four weeks and the improved performance was across all three tests. After an intensive remedial reading experience, both boys are reading at near grade level with no other reported academic problems. The take-home messages from these case studies are: 1) motivation must be considered in APD evaluation, as children may be misdiagnosed as having an APD; and 2) motivation/reinforcement in APD assessment needs further study. ASHA Special Interest Division 6, Hearing and Hearing Disorders: Research and Diagnostics contributed this article. The division offers affiliates the opportunity to earn CEUs through self-study of its peer-reviewed publication, Perspectives; an exclusive e-mail list and Web forum; and other benefits. To learn more, visit Division 6’s Web page. References Silman S., Silverman C. A., & Emmer M. B. (2000). Central auditory processing disorders and reduced motivation: three case studies.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11, 57–63. Google Scholar Singer J., Hurley R. M., & Preece J. (1998). Effectiveness of central auditory processing (CAP) tests with children.American Journal of Audiology, 7, 73–84. LinkGoogle Scholar Author Notes Raymond M. Hurley, is an associate professor in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of South Florida, Tampa. Contact him at [email protected]. Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 12Issue 15November 2007 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Nov 1, 2007 Metrics Downloaded 235 times Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagleader-topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2007 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

Central Auditory Processing Effects Induced by Solvent Exposure

Various studies have demonstrated that organic solvent exposure may induce auditory damage. Studies conducted in workers occupationally exposed to solvents suggest, on the one hand, poorer hearing thresholds than in matched non-exposed workers, and on the other hand, central auditory damage due to solvent exposure. Taking into account the potential auditory damage induced by solvent exposure due to the neurotoxic properties of such substances, the present research aimed at studying the possible auditory processing disorder (APD), and possible hearing difficulties in daily life listening situations that solvent-exposed workers may acquire. Fifty workers exposed to a mixture of organic solvents (xylene, toluene, methyl ethyl ketone) and 50 non-exposed workers matched by age, gender and education were assessed. Only subjects with no history of ear infections, high blood pressure, kidney failure, metabolic and neurological diseases, or alcoholism were selected. The subjects had either normal hearing or sensorineural hearing loss, and normal tympanometric results. Hearing-in-noise (HINT), dichotic digit (DD), filtered speech (FS), pitch pattern sequence (PPS), and random gap detection (RGD) tests were carried out in the exposed and non-exposed groups. A self-report inventory of each subject's performance in daily life listening situations, the Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap, was also administered. Significant threshold differences between exposed and non-exposed workers were found at some of the hearing test frequencies, for both ears. However, exposed workers still presented normal hearing thresholds as a group (equal or better than 20 dB HL). Also, for the HINT, DD, PPS, FS and RGD tests, non-exposed workers obtained better results than exposed workers. Finally, solvent-exposed workers reported significantly more hearing complaints in daily life listening situations than non-exposed workers. It is concluded that subjects exposed to solvents may acquire an APD and thus the sole use of pure-tone audiometry is insufficient to assess hearing in solvent-exposed populations.

Dalsze badania nad testami mowy utrudnionej

The purpose of speech audiometry is to extend the diagnostics of central auditory processes. First audiometric tests were monaural tests introduced in the fifties by Bocca and Calearo to diagnose Central Auditory Processing Disorders (CAPD). Monaural tests are characterized by low redundancy, which allows for deciphering a given word or phrase only if the amount of accessible information exceeds a required minimum. Until now, a new monaural filtered speech test has been drawn up at the Department of Phoniatrics and Audiology. The purpose of the research was to draw up and assess the effectiveness of monaural low redundancy tests, in which the acoustic signal has been compressed or noise has been added. 35 people with normal hearing, aged 16–60, have been examined. The test material included: a compressed speech test, in which the speech signal has been accelerated by 25% with the use of Cool Edit Pro 2.0; the pauses between the words have not been shortened a speech-in-noise test, in which the noise has been added with the use of Cool Edit Pro 2.0. The signal/noise ratio has been set at the level of 10 dB. The examination has been conducted at three different volume levels: 25, 35 and 45 dB. Best results have been achieved at the volume level of 45 dB (above hearing threshold); There were differences in results at volume levels 25 dB and 35 dB in compressed speech test and at volume level 25 dB in speech in noise. Both tests have shown the influence of age on the test result which suggests undiagnosed CAPD among people (with normal hearing) aged over 55.

Evaluation of auditory processing disorders after whiplash injury

Whiplash patients often have many subjective complaints, such as headaches, concentration difficulties, fatigue, neck pain and vertigo. Objective assessment of these complaints is difficult and neurological and neuropsychological signs of damage are not obvious. Other complaints frequently expressed after whiplash injury are diminished speech intelligibility in noisy environments and decreased tolerance to ‘loud’ sounds. In the present study, the latter complaints were evaluated with behavioural auditory tests. A test battery for auditory processing disorders was administered to 22 chronic whiplash patients with normal peripheral hearing. The test battery consists of seven tests: a sentences-in-noise test, pattern recognition tests, words-in-noise test, dichotic digit test, filtered speech test, binaural fusion test and backward masking tests. The uncomfortable loudness level (UCL) was also assessed using speech material. In addition, a questionnaire on auditory handicap was administered. The results were...

The Impact of New Codes for the Evaluation of Central Auditory Function

The Impact of New Codes for the Evaluation of Central Auditory Function

Development of auditory processing in 6–12-year-old children: a longitudinal study

The development of auditory processing in children was investigated in a longitudinal study. A group of 20 children with normal cognitive and language development underwent several auditory tests at the ages of 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 years. At the age of 10 years, three subjects were lost to follow-up, as was one more subject at the age of 12 years. The auditory performance of the children was compared to the performance of a group of 20 adults. The auditory test battery consisted of a speech-in-noise test, a filtered speech test, a binaural fusion test and two auditory sequencing tests. At the ages of 6, 7 and 8 years, data on the performance on an auditory word discrimination test, an auditory synthesis test, an auditory closure test and a number recall test were also obtained. All auditory tests except the speech-in-noise test showed a clear effect of age on the performance of children. Our data suggest that maturational effects play an important role in auditory processing (at least) up to an age of 12–13 years. Correlations between the tests are in general not indicative of large amounts of overlap between the different tests. Factor analysis shows that three factors account for 68–70% of explained variance, with the three factors contributing equally. A composite score obtained by averaging all (sub)test scores can be used next to the individual test scores to describe the development of auditory processing abilities in children.Se investigó el desarrollo del procesamiento auditivo en niños mediante un estudio longitudinal. Un grupo de 20 niños con desarrollo cognitivo y lingüístico normal fue sometido a diversas pruebas auditivas a los 6, 7, 8, 10 y 12 años. Durante el seguimiento, se perdieron 3 casos a la edad de 10 años y uno más a la edad de 12. El rendimiento auditivo de los niños se comparó con el de un grupo de 20 adultos. La batería para la evaluación auditiva consistió en una prueba de lenguaje en ruido, una de lenguaje filtrado, una de fusión binaural y dos de secuencias auditivas. A las edades de 6, 7 y 8 años, se obtuvieron tambiélos datos de rendimiento en una prueba de discriminación auditiva de palabras, una de síntesis auditiva, una de clausura auditiva y una de memoria de n�s. Todas las pruebas, excepto la de lenguaje en ruido, mostraron un claro efecto de la edad en el rendimiento de los niños. Nuestros datos sugieren que los efectos de maduración juegan un papel importante en el procesamiento auditivo (al menos) hasta la edad de 12–13 años. Las correlaciones entre las pruebas en general no son indicativas de una amplia sobreposición entre las mismas. El análisis de factores muestra que tres de ellos fueron responsables en igual proporción, del 68–70% de la varianza. Una puntuación compuesta obtenida por la promediación de las puntuaciones de todas las pruebas, puede ser usada junto con las puntuaciones individuales, para describir el desarrollo de las habilidades del procesamiento auditivo en niños.

The performance of South African English first and second adult speakers on a "low linguistically loaded" central auditory processing test protocol

The lack of standardized tests for central auditory processing disorders (CAPD) in South Africa (SA) led to the formation of a SA CAPD Taskforce, and the interim development of a "Low Linguistically Loaded" CAPD test protocol using test recordings from the 'Tonal and Speech Materials for Auditory Perceptual Assessment Disc 2.0'. This study compared the performance of 50 SA English first language child speakers (aged 8 to 12 years of age) on this protocol, with the previously published American normative data of Bellis (1996, 2003). Results with respect to predicted pass criteria as calculated by mean-2SD cutoffs, suggested that the SA speakers performed of a lower level than the American speakers by an average of 5.3% per ear for the two pair dichotic digits test, 1.9 dB for the masking level difference test, 8.8% per ear for the frequency pattern test--humming report, 14.5% per ear for the frequency patterns test--verbal report, and 39.7% per ear for the low pass filtered speech test. Consequently, the Bellis (1996, 2003) data was not considered appropriate for immediate use as normative data in SA. Instead, the preliminary data provided in this study was recommended as interim normative data for SA English first language child speakers until larger scale SA normative data can be obtained.

The performance of South African English first language child speakers on a "low linguistically loaded" central auditory processing test protocol

The lack of standardized tests for central auditory processing disorders (CAPD) in South Africa (SA) led to the formation of a SA CAPD Taskforce,and the interim development of a "Low Linguistically Loaded" CAPD test protocol using test recordings from the 'Tonal and Speech Materials for Auditory Perceptual Assessment Disc 2.0'. This study compared the performance of 50 SA English first language child speakers (aged 8 to 12 years of age) on this protocol, with the previously published American normative data of Bellis (1996, 2003). Results with respect to predicted pass criteria as calculated by mean-2SD cutoffs,suggested that the SA speakers performed of a lower level than the American speakers by an average of 5.3% per ear for the two pair dichotic digits test, 1.9 dB for the masking level difference test,8.8% per ear for the frequency pattern test - humming report, 14.5% per ear for the frequency patterns test - verbal report,and 39.7% per ear for the low pass filtered speech test. Consequently, the Bellis (1996, 2003) data was not considered appropriate for immediate use as normative data in SA. Instead, the preliminary data provided in this study was recommended as interim normative data for SA English first language child speakers until larger scale SA normative data can be obtained.

Auditory processing in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A.

It is unclear whether Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) disease, type 1A, causes auditory processing disorders. Therefore, auditory processing abilities were investigated in five CMT1A patients with normal hearing. Previous studies have failed to separate peripheral from central auditory processing disorders. Five genetically confirmed CMT1A cases in patients with normal hearing underwent behavioral and objective testing. Pure tone audiometry, speech audiometry, and OAE assessment were followed-up by an auditory processing test battery comprising sentences-in-noise test, pattern recognition tests, words-in-noise test, dichotic digit test, filtered speech test, binaural fusion test, and categorical speech perception test. Subsequently, ABR and ERP measurements were conducted. Either the behavioral or objective test scores of 4 out of the 5 CMT1A patients did not differ significantly from those of subjects with normal hearing. Significantly lower scores of one patient on auditory processing tests and ABR measurements could be ascribed to subnormal hearing. The authors conclude that CMT1A patients with normal peripheral hearing have auditory processing abilities that were not indicative for an auditory processing disorder. Furthermore, the presence of a peripheral hearing loss complicates the interpretation of auditory processing abilities.

Assessment of auditory processing in 6-year-old language-impaired children: Evaluacion del procesamiento auditivo en niños de 6 años con trastornos del lenguaje

The performance of a group of twenty 6-year-old children with specific language impairment (SLI) on several behavioural auditory tests was compared to that of a group of twenty age-matched control children. The auditory test battery used in this study consisted of the following tests: a speech-in-noise test, a filtered speech test, a binaural fusion test, a frequency pattern test, a duration pattern test, a temporal integration test, an auditory word discrimination test, an auditory synthesis test, an auditory closure test and a number recall test. Our results show that the SLI children obtained scores on almost all tests that were significantly lower than those of the control group. Many of the basic auditory processing measures in our test battery correlated significantly with receptive and language scores, suggesting a (causal) relationship between auditory processing and language proficiency. Results from discriminant function analyses do not warrant deleting one or more tests from the test battery yet (with the exception of the auditory synthesis test and the temporal integration test, for which we did not find significant group effects). At present, we are conducting experiments with older (SLI and control) children and adults to find whether the significant performance deficits of the SLI children are also found in older SLI children, and to determine the influence of maturational effects on these auditory tests.SumarioSe comparó el rendimiento en varias pruebas conductuales auditivas de un grupo de veinte niños de 6 años de edad con deficiencies específicas del lenguaje (SLI), con el de un grupo control de veinte niños con edades similares. La batería de pruebas auditivas utilizada en este estudio consistió en: una prueba de lenguaje en ruido, una prueba de lenguaje filtrado, una prueba de fusión binaural, una prueba de patrones de frecuencia, una prueba de patroncs de duración, una prueba de integración temporal, una prueba de discriminatión auditiva del habla, una prueba de síntesis auditiva, una prueba de cierre auditivo y una prueba de memoria de números. Nuestros resultados muestran que los niños con SLI lograron, en casi todas las pruebas, puntuaciones significativamente más bajas que aquellas del grupo control. Muchas de las medidas básicas de procesamiento auditivo de nuestra batería de pruebas mostraron una correlación significaliva con las puntuaciones de recepción y del lenguaje, sugiriendo una relación causal entre el procesamiento auditivo y la competencia lingüística. Los resultados de los análisis de función discriminatoria no sugieren aún la eliminatión de una o más pruebas de la batería (con la excepción de la prueba de síntesis auditiva y la de integración temporal, para las cuáles no encontramos un cfecto significativo de grupo). Actualmente, estamos conduciendo experimentos con niños mayores (con SLI y en grupo control) y con adultos, para averiguar si las deficiencias significativas de rendimiento en los niños con SLI se encuentran también en niños mayores con SLI, y determinar así la influencia de un efecto de maduración en estas pruebas auditivas.