Management of Amplification Technology in School

ABSTRACT

Students with auditory disabilities often rely on hearing aids, cochlear implants, hearing assistance technology (e.g., assistive listening devices), or a combination thereof to access spoken language. Following the fitting of amplification, a management plan must be put in place to ensure that predetermined technology goals are consistently met. This plan addresses how and when the instruments will be used; appropriate orientation and training for all stakeholders; the process for validating the benefits and limitations of technology; and the implementation of a program for monitoring efficacy. Educational audiologists have a statutory responsibility to ensure that a technology management plan is implemented in the child's school environment.

KEYWORDS

Educational audiologist - hearing assistance technology - amplification - validation

REFERENCES

• 1 Ross M, Calvert D R. Guidelines for audiology programs in educational settings for hearing impaired children.  Volta Review. 1977;  79 153-161
• 2 Blair J C, Berg F S. Problems and needs of hard-of-hearing students and a model for the delivery of services to the schools.  ASHA. 1982;  24 541-546
• 3 Building the Legacy .IDEA 2004. Available at: http://idea.ed.gov Accessed July 29, 2009
• 4 National Center on Response to Intervention .Available at: http://www.rti4success.org/images/stories/webinar/what%20is%20rti%20-%20webinar%205%2014%2008.pdf Accessed July 26, 2009
• 5 Your rights under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/resources/factsheets/504.pdf
• 6 Johnson C. Classroom Listening Assessment. Paper presented at: Illinois Academy of Audiology Annual Convention January 28–30, 2009 Chicago, IL;
• 7 American Academy of Audiology .Pediatric amplification protocol 2003. Available at: http://www.audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/Documents/pedamp.pdf Accessed July 26, 2009
• 8 American Academy of Audiology .Clinical Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth Birth–21 years. Available at: http://www.audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/Documents/HATGuideline042208.pdf
• 9 Professional Shortages in Educational Audiology . The ASHA Leader. 2008;  13 16
• 10 Mendel L L. Objective and subjective hearing aid assessment outcomes.  Am J Audiol. 2007;  16 118-129
• 11 Cox R M. Waiting for evidence-based practice for your hearing aid fittings? It's here!.  Hear J. 2004;  57 10-17
• 12 Weinstein B E. Introduction: customer satisfaction with and benefit from hearing aids.  Semin Hear. 1997;  18 3-5
• 13 The Pediatric Working Group . Amplification for infants and children with hearing loss.  Am J Audiol. 1996;  5 53-68
• 14 Mueller G. Speech audiometry and hearing aid fittings: going steady or casual acquaintances?.  Hear J. 2001;  54 19-29
• 15 Paatsch L E, Blamey P J, Sarant J Z, Martin L F, Bow C P. Separating contributions of hearing, lexical knowledge, and speech production to speech-perception scores in children with hearing impairments.  J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2004;  47 738-750
• 16 Blamey P J, Sarant J Z, Paatsch L E et al. Relationships among speech perception, production, language, hearing loss, and age in children with impaired hearing.  J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001;  44 264-285
• 17 Eisenberg L S, Johnson K C. Audiologic contributions to pediatric cochlear implants.  The ASHA Leader. 2008;  13 10-13
• 18 Stelmachowicz P G. Hearing aid outcome measures for children.  J Am Acad Audiol. 1999;  10 14-25 quiz 66
• 19 American Speech Language and Hearing Association .Guidelines for audiology service provision in and for schools. 2002. http://Available at: www.asha.org/policy Accessed July 26, 2009
• 20 McArdle R, Wilson R H. Predicting word-recognition performance in noise by young listeners with normal hearing using acoustic, phonetic, and lexical variables.  J Am Acad Audiol. 2008;  19 507-518
• 21 Davidson L S, Skinner M W. Audibility and speech perception of children using wide dynamic range compression hearing AIDS.  Am J Audiol. 2006;  15 141-153
• 22 Johnson C D, Benson P V, Seaton J B. Educational Audiology Handbook. San Diego, CA; Singular 1997
• 23 Johnson C D. The Functional Listening Evaluation. Available at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/download/pdf/s4-FunListEval.pdf Accessed July 26, 2009
• 24 Tharpe A M. Who has time for functional auditory assessments? We all do! Volta Voices 2004; November:10–12. 
• 25 Anderson K, Smaldino J. Children's Home Inventory of Listening Difficulties (CHILD). Available at: http://kandersonaudconsulting.com Accessed July 26, 2009
• 26 Robbins A M, Renshaw J J, Berry S W. Evaluating meaningful auditory integration in profoundly hearing-impaired children.  Am J Otol. 1991;  12(Suppl) 144-150
• 27 Zimmerman-Phillips S, Robbins A, Osberger M. Assessing cochlear implant benefit in very young children.  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2000;  109(Suppl 185, Pt 2) 42-44
• 28 Robbins A M, Svirsky M, Osberger M J, Pisoni D B. Beyond the audiogram: the role of functional assessments. In: Bess F Children with Hearing Impairment: Contemporary Trends. Nashville TN; Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center Press 1998: 105-124
• 29 Conversion of IT-MAIS Scores to Normal-Hearing Age Equivalent. Available from http://www.amymcconkeyrobbins.com/IT-MAISchart.html Accessed July 29, 2009
• 30 Robbins A M, Osberger M J. Meaningful Use of Speech Scale (MUSS). Indianapolis, IN; Indiana University School of Medicine 1990
• 31 Anderson K. Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk (S.I.F.T.E.R.). 1989. Available at: http://www.kandersonaudconsulting.com Accessed July 28, 2009
• 32 Anderson K. Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk in Preschool Children (Preschool S.I.F.T.E.R.) 1996. Available at: http://www.kandersonaudconsulting.com Accessed July 28, 2009
• 33 Anderson K. Screening Inventory for Targeting Educational Risk in Secondary Students (Secondary S.I.F.T.E.R). 2004. Available at: http://www.kandersonaudconsulting.com Accessed July 28, 2009
• 34 Anderson K, Smaldino J. Listening Inventory for Education (L.I.F.E.). 1997. Available at: http://www.kandersonaudconsulting.com Accessed July 28, 2009
• 35 Gabbard S. The use of FM Technology for infants and young children. In FM Listening Evaluation. In: Fabry D, Johnson CD ACCESS: Achieving Clear Communication Employing Sound Solutions-Proceedings of the First International FM Conference. Phonak AG; 2003: 93-99
• 36 Williams C. The Children's Outcome Worksheets - an outcome measure focusing on children's needs (Ages 4–12). News from Oticon. January 2005. 2003. Available at: http://www.oticonusa.com/eprise/main/SiteGen/Uploads/Public/Downloads_Oticon/Pediatrics/COW.pdf Accessed July 28, 2009
• 37 Ling D. Speech and the hearing-impaired child: Theory and practice. Washington, DC; Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf 1976
• 38 Smiley D F. Using the Ling 6 Sound Test Everyday. Speech Pathology.com. March 3, 2004. Available at: http://www. Speech Pathology_com/Using the Ling 6-Sound Test Everyday.mht Accessed July 28, 2009
• 39 Agung K, Purdy S C, Kitamura C. The Ling Sound Test revisited.  Aust N Z J Audiol. 2005;  27 33-41
• 40 Moog J S, Geers A E. Early Speech Perception Test. St. Louis, MO; Central Institute for the Deaf 1990
• 41 Biedenstein J J, Davidson L S, Moog J S. SPICE: Speech Perception Instructional Curriculum and Evaluation. St. Louise, MO; Central Institute for the Deaf 1995
• 42 Auditory Skills Instructional Planning System .Office of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools. North Hollywood, CA; Foreworks 1980
• 43 Stredler-Brown A, Johnson D. Functional auditory performance indicators: an integrated approach to auditory development. Available at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/download/pdf/FAPI_3-1-04g.pdf Accessed July 28, 2009
• 44 Wilkes B. Cottage Acquisition Scales for Listening, Language & Speech. San Antonio, TX; Sunshine Cottage School for Deaf Children 2001