Assistive and Therapeutic Effects of Amplification for Auditory Processing Disorder

William J. Keith; Suzanne C. Purdy

doi:10.1055/s-0033-1363522

Seminars in Hearing, Table of Contents

Semin Hear 2014; 35(01): 027-038
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1363522

Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Assistive and Therapeutic Effects of Amplification for Auditory Processing Disorder

William J. Keith

¹SoundSkills Clinic

,

Suzanne C. Purdy

²Discipline of Speech Science, School of Psychology, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Studies of the effects of amplification with remote microphone hearing aids for children with auditory processing disorder or dyslexia consistently show therapeutic as well as assistive benefits from the amplification. The immediate assistive benefits include improved attention, learning, behavior and participation in class, and improved self-esteem and psychosocial development. The long-term therapeutic benefits include improvements in cortical auditory evoked potential amplitudes to tone stimuli, auditory brainstem responses to speech stimuli, frequency discrimination, binaural temporal resolution, frequency pattern recognition, auditory working memory, core language, phonological awareness, and speech perception in spatially separated noise. Amplification appears to treat a wide range of auditory skills simultaneously, facilitating neuroplastic change while also providing access to the auditory world. Expert intervention to engage the support of teachers is a critical element in achieving successful outcomes. Children treated with remote microphone hearing aids may not require long-term amplification.

Keywords

Auditory processing - remote microphone hearing aids - FM systems - auditory neuroplasticity - dyslexia

Full Text

References

References
1 Thibodeau L. Benefits of adaptive FM systems on speech recognition in noise for listeners who use hearing aids. Am J Audiol 2010; 19 (1) 36-45 . Available at: http://aja.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/19/1/36 . Accessed September 3, 2013
2 Eiten LR. Assessing open-ear EduLink fittings. In: Achieving Clear Communication Employing Sound Solutions—2008: Proceedings of the First International Virtual Conference on FM. Murten, Switzerland: Phonak Communications AG; 2010: 77-85
3 American Academy of Audiology Position Statement, Classroom Acoustics. 2011. Available at: http://audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/Pages/classroomacoustics.aspx . Accessed December 16, 2013
4 Smurzynski J. Acoustic foundations of signal enhancement and room acoustics. In: Chermak GD, Musiek FE, , eds. Handbook of (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder: Comprehensive Intervention: Volume II. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2007: 51-73
5 American Academy of Audiology Clinical Practice Guidelines, Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years. 2011. American Academy of Audiology, Reston, VA. Available at: http://audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/Pages/HearingAssistanceTechnologies.aspx . Accessed December 16, 2013
6 Hoen M, Rogiers M, Mulder H. Auditory processing disorders II: experimental results on APD management with personal FM systems. Speech Hear Rev 2010; ;8–9: 129-158 . Available at: http://www.phonakpro.com/content/dam/phonak/b2b/FM_eLibrary/Experimental_results_on_APD_management_with_personal_FM_systems.pdf . Accessed March 21, 2012
7 Cameron S, Dillon H, Newall P. The listening in spatialized noise test: an auditory processing disorder study. J Am Acad Audiol 2006; 17 (5) 306-320
8 Berg F, Blair J, Benson P. Classroom acoustics: the problem, impact, and solution. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 1996; 27: 16-20 . Available at: http://lshss.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/1/16 . Accessed November 4, 2013
9 Lagacé J, Jutras B, Gagné J-P. Auditory processing disorder and speech perception problems in noise: finding the underlying origin. Am J Audiol 2010; 19 (1) 17-25 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20308289
10 Schafer E, Kleineck M. Improvements in speech recognition using cochlear implants and three types of FM systems: a meta-analytic approach. J Educ Audiol 2009; 15: 4-14
11 Geffner D. Central auditory processing disorders: definition, description, and behaviors. In: Geffner D, Ross-Swain D, , eds. Auditory Processing Disorders: Assessment, Management, and Treatment. 2nd Ed. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2013: 59-87
12 Rickard NA, Heidtke UJ, O'Beirne GA. Assessment of auditory processing disorder in children using an adaptive filtered speech test. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (10) 687-697 Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23879742 . Accessed November 4, 2013
13 Phonak. EduLink: Improves speech understanding in noisy classrooms. Phonak Field Study News 2004; ; May
14 Johnston KN, John AB, Kreisman NV, Hall III JW, Crandell CC. Multiple benefits of personal FM system use by children with auditory processing disorder (APD). Int J Audiol 2009; 48 (6) 371-383 Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19925345 . Accessed November 2, 2011
15 Smart JL, Purdy SC, Kelly AS. Personal FM systems for children with auditory processing disorder—successfully fitting this heterogeneous population. In: Achieving Clear Communication Employing Sound Solutions—2008 Proceedings of the First International Virtual Conference on FM. Murten, Switzerland: Phonak Communications AG; 2010: 38-44
16 Friederichs E, Friederichs P. Electrophysiologic and psycho-acoustic findings following one-year application of a personal ear-level device in children with attention deficit and suspected central auditory processing disorder. J Educ Audiol 2005; 12: 31-36
17 Hornickel J, Zecker SG, Bradlow AR, Kraus N. Assistive listening devices drive neuroplasticity in children with dyslexia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012; 109 (41) 16731-16736 Available at: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1206628109 . Accessed September 5, 2012
18 Kreisman N, Crandell C, Hall J. Children with APD: emotional and social health status. Paper Presented at: ASHA Annual Convention; November 18–20, 2004; Philadelphia, PA
19 Yip, Fiona and Rickard N. Personal FM systems in Children with a Spatial Stream Segregation Deficit—Conf Poster. Conference of New Zealand Audiological Society (NZAS); March 1–4, 2011
20 Cameron S, Dillon H. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S). Ear Hear 2007; 28 (2) 196-211 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17496671
21 Sharma M, Purdy SC, Kelly AS. A randomized control trial of interventions in school-aged children with auditory processing disorders. Int J Audiol 2012; 51 (7) 506-518
22 Umat C, Mukari SZ, Ezan NF, Din NC. Changes in auditory memory performance following the use of frequency-modulated system in children with suspected auditory processing disorders. Saudi Med J 2011; 32 (8) 818-824 . Available at: http://www.smj.org.sa/PDFFiles/Aug11/Changes.pdf . Accessed May 15, 2013
23 Melby-Lervåg M, Hulme C. Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Dev Psychol 2013; 49 (2) 270-291 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22612437 . Accessed August 7, 2013
24 Hulme C, Melby-Lervåg M. Current evidence does not support the claims made for CogMed working memory training. J Appl Res Mem Cogn 2012; 1 (3) 197-200
25 Shipstead Z, Hicks KL, Engle RW. Cogmed working memory training: does the evidence support the claims?. J Appl Res Mem Cogn 2012; 1 (3) 185-193
26 Shipstead Z, Hicks KL, Engle RW. Working memory training remains a work in progress. J Appl Res Mem Cogn 2012; 1 (3) 217-219
27 Hodson W. Enhancing phonological patterns of young children with highly unintelligible speech. The ASHA Leader. 1990; 2013: 1-9
28 Flexer BC, Biley KK, Hinkley A, Harkema C, Holcomb J. Using sound-field systems to teach phonemic awareness to pre-schoolers. Hear J 2002; 55: 38-44
29 Moncrieff DW, Wertz D. Auditory rehabilitation for interaural asymmetry: preliminary evidence of improved dichotic listening performance following intensive training. Int J Audiol 2008; 47 (2) 84-97 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18236240 . Accessed November 2, 2011
30 Pratt H, Sohmer H. Correlations between psychophysical magnitude estimates and simultaneously obtained auditory nerve, brain stem and cortical responses to click stimuli in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1977; 43 (6) 802-812
31 Smart JL, Kelly AS, Searchfield GD, Lyons AM, Houghton JM. Rehabilitation of adults with auditory processing disorder and normal peripheral hearing: two case studies. Aust New Zeal J Audiol 2007; 29 (1) 53-59 . Available at: http://www.portico.org/Portico/article?article=pf16jrfvg2 . Accessed December 13, 2013
32 Kuk F, Jackson A, Keenan D, Lau CC. Personal amplification for school-age children with auditory processing disorders. J Am Acad Audiol 2008; 19 (6) 465-480 . Available at: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/aaa/jaaa/2008/00000019/00000006/art00005 . Accessed May 15, 2013
33 Kuk F. Hearing aids for children with auditory processing disorders?. Semin Hear 2011; 32 (2) 189-195
34 Larsen JB, Blair JC. The effect of classroom amplification on the signal-to-noise ratio in classrooms while class is in session. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 2008; 39 (4) 451-460 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18820087 . Accessed September 3, 2013
35 Phonak. Traditional or Dynamic Sound Field: Which one gives better speech understanding in noise?. Phonak Field Study News 2011; ; January
36 Dockrell JE, Shield B. The impact of sound-field systems on learning and attention in elementary school classrooms. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2012; 55 (4) 1163-1176 . Available at: http://jslhr.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/55/4/1163 . Accessed May 15, 2013
37 Veuillet E, Magnan A, Ecalle J, Thai-Van H, Collet L. Auditory processing disorder in children with reading disabilities: effect of audiovisual training. Brain 2007; 130 (Pt 11): 2915-2928 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17921181 . Accessed July 15, 2011
38 Corriveau KH, Goswami U, Thomson JM. Auditory processing and early literacy skills in a preschool and kindergarten population. J Learn Disabil 2010; 43 (4) 369-382 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20457882 . Accessed October 10, 2011
39 Rance G, Corben LA, Du Bourg E, King A, Delatycki MB. Successful treatment of auditory perceptual disorder in individuals with Friedreich ataxia. Neuroscience 2010; 171 (2) 552-555 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20849937 . Accessed June 21, 2013
40 Lewis MS, Hutter M, Lilly DJ, Bourdette D, Saunders J, Fausti SA. Frequency-modulation (FM) technology as a method for improving speech perception in noise for individuals with multiple sclerosis. J Am Acad Audiol 2006; 17 (8) 605-616 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16999255 . Accessed on December 13, 2013
41 Cameron S, Glyde H, Dillon H. Efficacy of the LiSN & Learn auditory training software: randomized blinded controlled study. Audiol Res 2012; 2 (1) e15 , 86–93. Available at: http://www.audiologyresearch.org/index.php/audio/article/view/68 . Accessed June 24, 2013
42 Schafer EC, Mathews L, Mehta S , et al. Personal FM systems for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and/or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): an initial investigation. J Commun Disord 2013; 46 (1) 30-52 . Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23123089 . Accessed August 3, 2013
43 Johnson CD. Strategies for managing remote microphone hearing assistance technology in the schools. In: Achieving Clear Communication Employing Sound Solutions—2008: Proceedings of the First International Virtual Conference on FM. Murten, Switzerland: Phonak Communications AG; 2010: 27-35
44 Smoski W, Brunt M, Tannahill J. Listening characteristics of children with central auditory processing disorders. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 1992; 23: 145-152
45 Anderson K, Smaldino J. Children's Home Inventory for Listening Difficulties (CHILD). Educ Audiol Rev 2000; 17 (3) . Available at: http://www.oticon.com/~asset/cache.ashx?id=10831&type=14&format=web . Accessed December 16, 2013
46 Anderson K, Matkin N. Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk (SIFTER). Tampa, FL: Educ Audiol Assoc; 1996. . Available at: http://successforkidswithhearingloss.com/uploads/SIFTER.pdf . Accessed December 16, 2013
47 Anderson K, Smaldino J. Listening inventories for education: a classroom measurement tool. Hear J 1999; 52 (10) 74-76
48 Johnson C. The functional listening evaluation, revised. 2004 . Available at: http://handsandvoices.org/pdf/func_eval.pdf . Accessed December 16, 2013