Behavioral assessment of auditory processing disorder in children with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate

2015 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoran Ma ◽  
Bradley McPherson ◽  
Lian Ma
2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (03) ◽  
pp. 222-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole V. Kreisman ◽  
Andrew B. John ◽  
Brian M. Kreisman ◽  
James W. Hall ◽  
Carl C. Crandell

Background: Children with hearing loss often exhibit reduced psychosocial status compared to children with normal hearing. It is reasonable to assume that psychosocial function may also be affected in children diagnosed with auditory processing disorder (APD). However, there are no published studies specifically addressing the psychosocial health of children with APD. Purpose: This investigation examined relationships between APD and psychosocial status, with an aim to examine nonauditory factors that may influence quality of life of children diagnosed with APD. Research Design: A two-matched group design was employed. Participants and their mothers completed appropriate versions of the Dartmouth Primary Care Cooperative Information Project Charts for Adolescents (COOP-A), the Behavioral Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-2), and the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS). Study Sample: Participants consisted of 19 children (aged 9.5–17.8 yr; mean = 11.9) diagnosed with APD and 20 gender- and age-matched (mean = 12.8 yr) children with no evidence of APD by history or audiological assessment. Primary caretakers (mothers) of the participants also completed psychosocial questionnaires according to their perception of their participating child's function. Data Collection and Analysis: Data were collected at a single visit, following APD diagnosis. Data from each questionnaire were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods for two-group comparisons. Results: Analysis of child reports revealed significantly greater psychosocial difficulty in the APD group on subscales of the COOP-A and BASC-2. Increased problems in the APD group were also reported by parents on subscales of the COOP-A, BASC-2, and SSRS. Eta-squared values for all significant findings indicated moderate to large effect sizes, suggesting findings may be generalized to other children in this age group. No between-group differences were found on any subscale for APD children with or without a confirmed or suspected language disorder. Conclusion: We found that children with APD exhibit increased psychosocial difficulty in several areas compared to children without APD.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ronald L. Schow ◽  
Harvey Dillon ◽  
Jessica Hillam ◽  
Mary M. Whitaker ◽  
J. Anthony Seikel

Introduction There is need for greater understanding of tests used in assessing all aspects of auditory processing disorder (APD). This is important so that specific deficits can be identified and later remediated with the smallest possible test battery. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) recommends five areas/domains for behavioral assessment: (a) temporal, (b) binaural (dichotic) separation/integration, (c) monaural low redundancy, (d) binaural interaction/localization/lateralization, and (e) auditory discrimination. Multiple-factor studies support the first three domains, which are most often used for APD assessment and which can be measured in a test battery normed within the United States (Multiple Auditory Processing Assessment–2 [MAPA-2]). This study was designed to determine if factored results from children would clarify whether a behavioral test (Listening in Spatialized Noise–Sentences Test [LiSN-S]) would factor within one of the first three domains or be separate, possibly within the fourth domain, binaural interaction. Method Fifty-one 8- and 9-year-olds with normal development and normal otoscopy and hearing responses bilaterally from 500 to 4000 Hz at 20 dB HL were recruited. Two sets of APD tests were administered: MAPA-2 and LiSN-S. Results Results verified the expected three-factor structure for MAPA-2. LiSN-S did not factor within one of those three, suggesting that some processes involved in the LiSN-S tasks require interactions between the two ears different from those involved in dichotic perception and thus better belong in the ASHA binaural interaction/lateralization domain. Conclusions Auditory processing abilities are sufficiently independent of each other that test batteries spanning the first three ASHA domains are not sensitive to at least some abilities in the fourth domain. This additional factor evidence is helpful. Future research should examine the utility of measuring additional factors within APD in order to achieve the most efficient and comprehensive test battery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document