Brainstem auditory evoked potentials in children with autism spectrum disorder

Abstract Background Neurological, structural, and behavioral abnormalities are widely reported in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD); yet there are no objective markers to date. We postulated that by using dominant and nondominant ear data, underlying differences in auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) between ASD and control groups can be recognized. Purpose The primary purpose was to identify if significant differences exist in AEPs recorded from dominant and nondominant ear stimulation in (1) children with ASD and their matched controls, (2) adults with ASD and their matched controls, and (3) a combined child and adult ASD group and control group. The secondary purpose was to explore the association between the significant findings of this study with those obtained in our previous study that evaluated the effects of auditory training on AEPs in individuals with ASD. Research Design Factorial analysis of variance with interaction was performed. Study Sample Forty subjects with normal hearing between the ages of 9 and 25 years were included. Eleven children and 9 adults with ASD were age- and gender-matched with neurotypical peers. Data Collection and Analysis Auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) and auditory late responses (ALRs) were recorded. Adult and child ASD subjects were compared with non-ASD adult and child control subjects, respectively. The combined child and adult ASD group was compared with the combined child and adult control group. Results No significant differences in ABR latency or amplitude were observed between ASD and control groups. ALR N1 amplitude in the dominant ear was significantly smaller for the ASD adult group compared with their control group. Combined child and adult data showed significantly smaller amplitude for ALR N1 and longer ALR P2 latency in the dominant ear for the ASD group compared with the control group. In our earlier study, the top predictor of behavioral improvement following auditory training was ALR N1 amplitude in the dominant ear. Correspondingly, the ALR N1 amplitude in the dominant ear yielded group differences in the current study. Conclusions ALR peak N1 amplitude is proposed as the most feasible AEP marker in the evaluation of ASD.

Download Full-text

BRAINSTEM AUDITORY EVOKED POTENTIALS CONFIRM IMPROVEMENT OF AUDITORY PROCESSING AFTER TRAININGS BY A. TOMATIS METHOD IN CHILDREN WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISPORDERS

Neuroscience for Medicine and Psychology ◽

10.29003/m387.sudak.ns2019-15/173-174 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Victoria Efimova ◽

Vladimir Rozhkov ◽

Irina Lysova ◽

Oleg Efimov

Keyword(s):

Evoked Potentials ◽

Auditory Processing ◽

Auditory Evoked Potentials ◽

Children With Autism ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials

Download Full-text

Reduced functional connectivity in visual evoked potentials in children with autism spectrum disorder

Clinical Neurophysiology ◽

10.1016/j.clinph.2010.05.004 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 121 (12) ◽

pp. 2035-2043 ◽

Cited By ~ 45

Author(s):

J.R. Isler ◽

K.M. Martien ◽

P.G. Grieve ◽

R.I. Stark ◽

M.R. Herbert

Keyword(s):

Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽

Functional Connectivity ◽

Evoked Potentials ◽

Visual Evoked Potentials ◽

Children With Autism ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Spectrum Disorder ◽

Visual Evoked

Download Full-text

Instruction Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication Supports: Description of Current Practices by Speech-Language Pathologists Who Work With Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2019_ajslp-19-00045 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (2) ◽

pp. 586-596 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kaitlyn A. Clarke ◽

Diane L. Williams

Keyword(s):

Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽

Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽

Communication Systems ◽

Diagnostic Category ◽

Children With Autism ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Spectrum Disorder ◽

Alternative Communication ◽

Speech Language Pathologists ◽

Processing Differences

Purpose The aim of this research study was to examine common practices of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who work with children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) with respect to whether or not SLPs consider processing differences in ASD or the effects of input during their instruction. Method Following a qualitative research method, how SLPs instruct and present augmentative and alternative communication systems to individuals with ASD, their rationale for method selection, and their perception of the efficacy of selected interventions were probed. Semistructured interviews were conducted as part of an in-depth case report with content analysis. Results Based on completed interviews, 4 primary themes were identified: (a) instructional method , (b) input provided , (c) decision-making process , and (d) perceived efficacy of treatment . Additionally, one secondary theme, training and education received , was identified . Conclusions Clinicians reported making decisions based on the needs of the child; however, they also reported making decisions based on the diagnostic category that characterized the child (i.e., ASD). The use of modeling when teaching augmentative and alternative communication to individuals with ASD emerged as a theme, but variations in the method of modeling were noted. SLPs did not report regularly considering processing differences in ASD, nor did they consider the effects of input during instruction.

Download Full-text