Auditory Event-Related Potentials in the Assessment of Auditory Processing Disorders: A Pilot Study

A. Liasis; D.-E. Bamiou; P. Campbell; T. Sirimanna; S. Boyd; A. Towell

doi:10.1055/s-2003-38622

Neuropediatrics, Table of Contents

Neuropediatrics 2003; 34(1): 23-29
DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-38622

Original Article

Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Auditory Event-Related Potentials in the Assessment of Auditory Processing Disorders: A Pilot Study

A. Liasis¹ ^, ² , D.-E. Bamiou³ , P. Campbell³ , T. Sirimanna³ , S. Boyd² , A. Towell² ^, ⁴

¹Department of Ophthalmology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, U.K.
²Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, U.K.
³Audiological Medicine, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, U.K.
⁴University of Westminster, London, U.K.

Abstract

The aim of this pilot study was to investigate whether children with a suspected auditory processing disorder (sAPD) in the presence of normal hearing, differ significantly from normal age-matched controls on particular parameters of auditory event-related potentials. We assessed nine children (mean age 9.5 years) in whom the clinical profile and the results in a screening test for auditory processing disorder (SCAN/SCAN-A) suggested the presence of an auditory processing disorder, and nine age-matched normal control subjects, using auditory event-related potentials (ERP) to phonemes/ba/(standard) and/da/(deviant). Analysis of the auditory ERP recordings revealed an enlarged P85 - 120 and attenuated N1 and P2 in all sAPD children compared to controls. We also found significantly increased N1 peak latency, and a larger peak to peak amplitude of the P85 - 120-N1 and P2-N2 and smaller peak to peak amplitude of the N1-P2 in the sAPD children. Subtraction of the standard auditory ERP from the deviant revealed a mismatch negativity with no significant differences in duration, peak or onset latency between the control subjects and sAPD. Our results indicate that neurophysiological measures may identify a group of children with specific problems suggestive of an auditory processing disorder in the absence of an obvious structural or functional lesion who warrant further study in order to assess whether these findings reflect delayed CNS myelination.

Key words

Auditory evoked potentials - auditory processing disorder - mismatch negativity

Full Text

References

1 American Speech and Language Hearing Association . Central auditory processing: current status of research and implications for clinical practice. Am J Audiol. 1996; 5 2
2 Baran J, Musiek F E. Behavioral assessment of the central auditory nervous system. Musiek FE, Rintelman WF Contemporary Perspectives in Hearing Assessment. Boston; Allyn and Bacon 1999
3 British Society of Audiology . Recommended procedure for pure tone audiometry using a manually operated instrument. Br J Audiol. 1981; 15 213-216
4 Bruneau N, Roux S, Guerin P, Barthelemy C. Temporal prominence of auditory evoked potentials (N1 wave) in 4 - 8-year-old children. Psychophysiology. 1997; 34 32-38
5 Cacace A T, McFarland D J. Central auditory processing disorder in school-aged children: a critical review. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998; 41 355-73
6 Cheour M, Alho K, Sainio K, Reinikainen K. et al . The mismatch negativity to changes in speech sounds at the age of three months. Dev Neuropsychol. 1997; 13 167-174
7 Chermak G D, Musiek F E. Central Auditory Processing Disorders: New Perspectives. San Diego; Singular Publishing Group 1997
8 Dehaene-Lambertz G. Electrophysiological correlates of categorical phoneme perception in adults. Neuroreport. 1997; 8 919-924
9 Giard M H, Perrin F, Echallier J F, Thevenet M, Froment J C, Pernier J. Dissociation of temporal and frontal components in the human auditory N1 wave: a scalp current density and dipole model analysis. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol. 1994; 92 238-252
10 Hurley R M. Musiek FE. Effectiveness of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) in predicting hearing level. J Am Acad of Audiol. 1994; 5 195-203
11 Jerger J, Musiek F. Report of the consensus conference on the diagnosis of auditory processing disorders in school-aged children. J Am Acad Audiol. 2000; 11 467-474
12 Keith R W. SCAN - A screening Test for Auditory Processing Disorders. Cincinatti, Ohio; Psychological Corporation 1986
13 Keith R W. SCAN - A Test for Auditory Processing Disorders in Adolescents and Adults. Cincinatti, Ohio; Psychological Corporation 1994
14 Kemp D T, Ryan S, Bray P. A guide to the effective use of otoacoustic emissions. Ear Hear. 1990; 11 93-105
15 Kraus N, McGee T, Micco A, Sharma A, Carrell T, Nicol T. Mismatch negativity in school-age children to speech stimuli that are just perceptibly different. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1993; 88 123-130
16 Liasis A, Towell A, Alho K, Boyd S. Intracranial identification of a frontal component to acoustic change: a case study. Cogn Brain Res. 2001; 11 227-233
17 Marriage J, King J, Briggs J, Lutman M E. The reliability of the SCAN test: results from a primary school population in the UK. Br J Audiol. 2001; 35 199-208
18 Moore J K, Perazzo L M, Braun A. Time course of axonal myelination in the human brainstem auditory pathway. Hear Res. 1995; 87 21-31
19 Musiek F E, Gollegly K M, Lamb L E, Lamb P. Selected issues in screening for central auditory processing dysfunction. Semin Hear. 1990; 11 372-383
20 Musiek F E, Gollegly K, Ross M. Profiles of types of auditory processing disorders in children with learning disabilities. J Child Comm Dis. 1985; 9 43-63
21 Näätänen R. The role of attention in auditory information processing as revealed by event-related potentials and other brain measures of cognitive function. Beh Brain Sci. 1990; 13 201-288
22 Näätänen R. The mismatch negativity: a powerful tool for cognitive neuroscience. Ear Hear. 1995; 16 6-18
23 Näätänen R, Picton T. The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: a review and an analysis of the component structure. Psychophysiology. 1987; 24 375-425
24 Pallier C, Dupoux E, Jeannin X. EXPE; an expandable programming language for on-line physiological experiments. Beh Res Methods, Instruments and Computers. 1997; 29 322-327
25 Sams M, Hari R, Rif J, Knuutila J. The human auditory sensory memory trace persists about 10 sec: Neuromagnetic evidence. J Cog Neurosci. 1993; 5 363-370
26 Schwartz D M, Morris M D, Jacobson J T. The normal auditory brainstem response and its variants. Jacobson JT Principles and Applications in Auditory Evoked Potentials. Chapter 6. London; Allyn and Bacon 1994
27 Sharma A, Kraus N, McGee T J, Nicol T G. Developmental changes in P1 and N1 central auditory responses elicited by consonant-vowel syllables. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997; 104 540-545
28 Tallal P, Miller S L, Byma G, Wang X, Nagarajan S S, Schreiner C. et al . Language comprehension in language-learning impaired children improved with acoustically modified speech. Science. 1996; 271 81-84
29 Tonnquist-Uhlen I, Borg E, Spens K E. Topography of auditory evoked long-latency potentials in normal children, with particular reference to the N1 component. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1995; 95 34-41

Alki Liasis

Department of Ophthalmology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children

Great Ormond Street

London WC1 N 3JH

U.K.

Email: a.liasis@ich.ucl.ac.uk