Comparison of Persian staggered spondaic word test’s scores before and after rehabilitation in children with amblyaudia
Background and Aim: Amblyaudia is a diagnostic issue in central auditory processing disorder (CAPD), which is characterized by asymmetry in dichotic listening performance. This disorder negatively affects the academic performance of children by influencing their information processing, reading, attention, etc. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of the dichotic interaural intensity difference (DIID) training on all auditory processing categories of the Buffalo Model using the Persian staggered spondaic word (P-SSW) test.
Methods: The study was conducted on 17 children (11 girls and 6 boys) aged 8−12 years old diagnosed with amblyaudia. All children were first evaluated by the P-SSW test, and then participated in 10−12 sessions of the DIID training. The P-SSW test was taken again after completing the training program in order to evaluate the training effect.
Results: The paired t-test results showed a significant reduction in the mean scores of decoding (p < 0.001) and tolerance fading memory (p < 0.004) categories as well as the total mean score of P-SSW test after training. The Wilcoxon test also showed the effect of this training on the integration category (p < 0.025). The McNemar test, however, showed no statistically significant effect of the DIID training on the organization category.
Conclusion: The DIID training causes significant improvement in some central auditory processing categories of the Buffalo Model, including decoding, tolerance fading memory and integration.
2. Moncrieff D, editor Amblyaudia: Evidence of indistinct processing of auditory information in children. Proceedings of the American Auditory Society Annual Meeting; 2010.
3. Doshi NR, Rodriguez MLF. Amblyopia. Am Fam Physician. 2007;75(3):361-7.
4. Moncrieff D, Keith W, Abramson M, Swann A. Diagnosis of amblyaudia in children referred for auditory processing assessment. Int J Audiol. 2016;55(6):333-45. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1128003
5. Kimura D. Some effects of temporal-lobe damage on auditory perception. Can J Psychol. 1961;15:156-65. doi: 10.1037/h0083218
6. Denes G, Caviezel F. Dichotic listening in crossed aphasia 'paradoxical' ipsilateral suppression. Arch Neurol. 1981;38(3):182-5. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1981.00510030076011
7. Geffner D, Ross-Swain D. Auditory processing disorders: assessment, management and treatment. 2nd ed. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2012.
8. Whitton JP, Polley DB. Evaluating the perceptual and pathophysiological consequences of auditory deprivation in early postnatal life: a comparison of basic and clinical studies. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2011;12(5):535-47. doi: 10.1007/s10162-011-0271-6
9. Moncrieff D, Jerger J, Wambacq I, Greenwald R, Black J. ERP evidence of a dichotic left-ear deficit in some dyslexic children. J Am Acad Audiol. 2004;15(7):518-34. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.15.7.6
10. Moncrieff DW, Demarest DW, Mormer ER, Littlepage R. Prevalence and severity of auditory processing deficits in adjudicated adolescents screened with dichotic listening tests: implications for diagnosis and intervention. Semin Hear. 2014;35(01):039-050. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1363523
11. Jerger J, Jerger S, Pirozzolo F. Correlational analysis of speech audiometric scores, hearing loss, age, and cognitive abilities in the elderly. Ear Hear. 1991;12(2):103-9. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199104000-00004
12. 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. doi: 10.1080/14992020701770835
13. Baran JA, Brooke Shinn J, Musiek FE. New developments in the assessment and management of auditory processing disorders. Hearing Balance Commun. 2006;4(1):35-45. doi: 10.1080/16513860600615432
14. Musiek FE, Schochat E. Auditory training and central auditory processing disorders: a case study. Semin Hear. 1998;19(4):357-65. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1082983
15. Musiek F, Weihing J, Lau C. Dichotic interaural intensity difference (DIID) training: a review of existing research and future directions. J Acad Reh. 2008;41:51-65.
16. Hajiabolhassan F, Lotfi Y, Azordegan F. [Introducing and evaluating a Farsi - language version of the staggered spondaic word test in normal hearing subject]. Audiol. 2006;15(1):39-46. Persian.
17. Negin E, Barootian SS. [Central auditory processing assessments; Buffalo model of auditory processing]. 1st ed. Tehran: Setayeshe Hasti Pub.; 2018. Persian.
18. Veale JF. Edinburgh handedness inventory - short form: a revised version based on confirmatory factor analysis. Laterality. 2014;19(2):164-77. doi: 10.1080/1357650X.2013.783045
19. Northern JL, Downs MP. Hearing in children. 5th ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
20. Mahdavi ME, Peyvandi AA. [Persian competing word test: Development and preliminary results in normal children]. Audiol. 2007;16(2):1-7. Persian.
21. Mahdavi ME, Pourbakht A, Parand A, Jalaie S. Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change of randomized dichotic digits in learning-disabled children: implications for dichotic listening training. J Am Acad Audiol. 2018;29(3):223-32. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.16134
22. Khamisabadi S, Ahadi M, Jalaie S, Jarollahi F, Ahmadi Z. Validity and reliability of the Persian version of buffalo model questionnaire (P-BMQ) among 7 to 12 years old normal children. Func Disabil J. 2019;2(1):71-7. doi: 10.34171/fdj.2.9
23. Katz J, Smith P. The Staggered Spodaic Word test. A ten minute look at the central nervous system through the ears. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1991;620:233-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1991.tb51587.x
24. Rosenzweig MR. Representations of the two ears at the auditory cortex. Am J Physiol. 1951;167(1):147-58. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1922.214.171.124
25. Hall 2nd JL, Goldstein Jr MH. Representation of binaural stimuli by single units in primary auditory cortex of unanesthetized cats. J Acoust Soc Am. 1968;43(3):456-61. doi: 10.1121/1.1910852
26. Musiek FE, Weihing J. Perspectives on dichotic listening and the corpus callosum. Brain Cogn. 2011;76(2):225-32. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2011.03.011
27. Musiek FE, Gollegly KM, Baran JA. Myelination of the corpus callosum and auditory processing problems in children: theoretical and clinical correlates. Semin Hear. 1984;5(3):231-40. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1095748
28. Salamy A. Commissural transmission: maturational changes in humans. 1978;200(4348):1409-11. doi: 10.1126/science.208144
29. Moncrieff D, Keith W, Abramson M, Swann A. Evidence of binaural integration benefits following ARIA training for children and adolescents diagnosed with amblyaudia. Int J Audiol. 2017;56(8):580-8. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2017.1303199
30. Negin E, Jarollahi F, Barootiyan SS, Seyyedi F, Jalaie S, Katz J. Development, validity, reliability and normative data of the Persian Phonemic Synthesis Test (P-PST). Int J Audiol. 2020;59(3):230-5. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2019.1688401
31. Negin E, Mohammadkhani G, Jalaie S, Jarollahi F. Efficacy of phonemic training program in rehabilitation of Persian-speaking children with auditory processing disorder: a single subject study. Aud Vestib Res. 2018;27(3):116-25. doi: 10.18502/avr.v27i3.52
32. Barootiyan SS, Jalilvand Karimi L, Jalaie S, Negin E. Development and evaluation of the efficacy of Persian phonemic synthesis program in children with (central) auditory processing disorder: a single subject study. Aud Vestib Res. 2018;27(2):101-10.
33. Katz J. Therapy for auditory processing disorders: simple effective procedures. Denver, CO: Educational Audiology Association; 2009.
|Issue||Vol 29 No 3 (2020)|
|Dichotic interaural intensity difference central auditory processing disorder amblyaudia|
|Rights and permissions|
|This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|