Speech Perception in Quiet and in Noise Condition in Individuals with Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder

Apeksha, Kumari; Kumar, Ajith U.

doi:10.5152/iao.2017.3172

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A high correlation (between 0.77 and 0.86) is generally observed between pure-tone average (PTA) and SRT in noise (Smits et al, 2004;Jansen et al, 2010Jansen et al, , 2013Koole et al, 2016;Potgieter et al, 2018a,b). However, discordance between PTA and SIN may be found in certain medical conditions, such as auditory neuropathy (Rance et al, 2012;Narne, 2013;Apeksha and Kumar, 2017;White-Schwoch et al, 2020 or central auditory processing disorders (Houtgast and Festen, 2008;Anderson et al, 2011;Bellis and Bellis, 2015;Füllgrabe et al, 2015). Use of SIN tests offers three main advantages: (1) they are more representative of the everyday discomfort and of the handicap experienced by hearing-impaired people (Carhart and Tillman, 1970;Kramer et al, 1998;Grant and Walden, 2013); (2) they are more sensitive to early events of age-related hearing impairment, detecting the loss of auditory neurons that cannot be detected by PTA or even by speech audiometry in quiet (Wu et al, 2020); and (3) the supra-threshold measurement of the SRT is less sensitive than pure-tone threshold measurements to minor calibration inaccuracies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of a French speech-in-noise self-test using synthetic voice in an adult population

Génin,

Courtial,

Balcon

et al. 2024

Front. Audiol. Otol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSpeech-in-noise (SIN) audiometry is a valuable part of audiological diagnostics and clinical measurements, providing information on an individual's ability to understand in noise. To date, such tests have been developed with natural voice presented monaurally or binaurally (via diotic and dichotic presentation). The time required to develop such tests is often long. The use of synthetic voice would simplify the test creation process and self-testing would improve accessibility.DesignMeasurements were performed using an Android tablet (Samsung Galaxy Tab A7) and calibrated Bluetooth headphones (Tilde Pro C, Orosound). Normative values were first defined using natural or synthetic voice on 69 normal-hearing participants. A total of 463 participants then undertook the SIN test comprising synthetic voice and dichotic antiphasic presentation. Of these, 399 also performed the SIN test with diotic presentation.ResultsNo significant differences in the speech reception threshold (SRT) were found between natural and synthetic voices for diotic presentations (p = 0.824, paired Student t-test) with normative values of −10.7 dB SNR (SD = 1.5 dB) and −10.4 dB SNR (SD = 1.4 dB), respectively. For the SoNoise test with synthetic voice and dichotic antiphasic presentation, the results showed a normative value of −17.5 dB SNR (SD = 1.5 dB), and a strong correlation (r = 0.797, p < 0.001) with the four-frequency pure-tone average (4f-PTA). Receiver operating curves (ROC) were then calculated: for a 4f-PTA of 20 dB hearing level (HL), the SRT was −14.5 dB SNR with a sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 89%. For a 4f-PTA of 30 dB HL, the SRT was −13.7 dB SNR with a sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 91%. For a 4f-PTA of 35 dB HL, the SRT was −13.0 dB SNR with a sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 93%. The normative binaural intelligibility level difference (BILD) value was 8.6 dB (SD = 2.0 dB) with normal-hearing participants. The learning effect due to the task and interface was 1.7 dB (1st to 7th test) and test duration was 3 min.ConclusionThe SoNoise test in its synthetic dichotic antiphasic presentation is a fast and reliable tool to diagnose hearing impairment at 20, 30, and 35 dB HL cut-offs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of a French speech-in-noise self-test using synthetic voice in an adult population

Génin,

Courtial,

Balcon

et al. 2024

Front. Audiol. Otol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite similar clinical findings on OAEs and ABRs, the functional characteristics of patients with ANSD range along a spectrum from profound hearing loss to normal or close to normal auditory thresholds. Similarly, speech understanding varies considerably (Starr et al 2000;Berlin et al 2010) and is usually much poorer than expected (i.e., out of proportion with the level of hearing impairment), particularly in noise (Rance et al 1999(Rance et al , 2004Zeng et al 2005;Apeksha & Kumar 2017). This variation in presentation greatly impacts the management of ANSD in young subjects as they can demonstrate significant delays in language development and speech production irrespective of their audiometric thresholds and some will not develop language at all without proper and timely intervention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 15-Year Review of 260 Children With Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder: I. Demographic and Diagnostic Characteristics

Morlet

Parkes²,

Pritchett³

et al. 2023

Ear &Amp; Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of the study was to review the demographic and clinical characteristics of all pediatric patients diagnosed with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD) by a pediatric health care system from 2005 to 2020 and examine whether or not our diagnostic capabilities in an ANSD population have evolved as our institutional experience has grown and knowledge in the field has expanded. Design: This was a retrospective study reviewing the demographic data, medical history, imaging studies, audiological and speech-language data, type of audiological intervention and mode of communication in 260 pediatric patients diagnosed with ANSD over a 15-year period. Results: The study revealed that male and female children were equally affected with all levels of hearing detection being represented and that about 40% of affected children were premature and most were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit. More than a third of our patients presented with a complex medical history and/or neural involvement while about 30% were full-term newborns with normal pregnancy, no prenatal complications or infections, normal birth weight, no neonatal intensive care unit need, no hyperbilirubinemia, no respiratory distress requiring ventilation, and no known syndrome. Review of audiological findings confirms that otoacoustic emissions are not always present in ANSD cases, and that the presence of an abnormal wave V on the auditory brainstem response tracings (only present at high intensities and with an absent intensity/latency function) is not a rare finding and should not immediately be dismissed as not being a case of ANSD. Conclusions: This review of ANSD diagnosis over a 15-year period clearly reveals the drastic improvements made in the identification of ANSD, with a drastic decrease in the age at diagnosis and a reduction in the percentage of misdiagnosed patients. The study also stresses the need for continued improvement in different areas such as genetic studies and physiological measures to help clinicians distinguish between pre- and postsynaptic ANSD.

show abstract

“…Finding, early in age, the right intervention for ANSD remains a challenging area for clinicians. It is not simply defined by the level of access to sounds, but by the speech processing capabilities which vary considerably between patients and are usually much poorer than expected (i.e., out of proportion with the level of hearing impairment), particularly in noise (Rance et al 1999; Starr et al 2000; Rance et al 2004; Zeng et al 2005; Berlin et al 2010; Apeksha & Kumar 2017). The presence of anatomical abnormalities and/or other brain disabilities can also exclude certain of types of intervention (e.g., when the cochlear nerve is totally absent).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 15-year Review of 260 Children With Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder: II. Management and Outcomes

Morlet

O’Reilly²,

Pritchett³

et al. 2023

Ear &Amp; Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Following a review of the demographic and clinical characteristics of all pediatric patients diagnosed with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD) by a pediatric health care system from 2005 to 2020, the present report highlights the type and timing of intervention and outcomes in the same 260 patients with ANSD. Design: This was a retrospective study reviewing the demographic data, medical history, imaging studies, audiological and speech language data, type of audiological intervention (hearing aids or cochlear implants), and mode of communication in 260 pediatric patients diagnosed with ANSD over a 15-year period. Results: A significant decrease over time in the age at hearing aid fitting was observed. While a similar reduction in the age at implantation occurred over time, cochlear implantation is still rarely performed by 12 months of age in most ANSD patients. Among bilateral ANSD patients fitted with hearing aids, the majority (89.2%) did not benefit from conventional amplification and most received cochlear implants. Some hearing aid benefit for speech and language development was observed in 5.8%, though communication difficulties were persistent and most used a combination of oral and sign language for communication. Only six patients (5%) received significant benefit from their hearing aids for speech and language development. Conclusions: This review of ANSD management over a 15-year period reveals that hearing aids are not a viable option to develop speech and language for most infants and children with ANSD. This finding confirms previous reports and suggest that while hearing aid trials are warranted, children must be tracked closely so as to avoid delays in decision making. Cochlear implantation constitutes the major (if not only) rehabilitative intervention that allows for speech perception in patients who do not benefit from conventional amplification.

show abstract

Speech Perception in Quiet and in Noise Condition in Individuals with Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder

Cited by 9 publications

References 18 publications

Development and validation of a French speech-in-noise self-test using synthetic voice in an adult population

Development and validation of a French speech-in-noise self-test using synthetic voice in an adult population

A 15-Year Review of 260 Children With Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder: I. Demographic and Diagnostic Characteristics

A 15-year Review of 260 Children With Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder: II. Management and Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About