Biomedical subjects

Karin Neijenhuis

Publications and source records attributed to Karin Neijenhuis.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

The effect of mild hearing impairment on auditory processing tests.

The application of auditory processing tests to patients with sensorineural hearing loss is controversial. Several studies have shown that it is difficult to separate peripheral from central hearing processes. In the present study, a Dutch auditory processing test battery was administered to 24 subjects with mild, relatively flat, symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss. Tests were administered twice; the second time, the presentation level in four out of the six tests was adjusted according to the speech reception threshold. The scores of the hearing-impaired subjects were significantly poorer than those of the subjects with normal hearing on five out of the six tests, even with the adjusted presentation level. Significant correlations were found between test scores and PTA (pure-tone average); scores on words-in-noise, filtered-speech and binaural-fusion tests were additionally corrected according to PTA. In contrast to previous studies in the literature, the present dichotic-digit and pattern-recognition tests were greatly influenced by mild hearing loss. Therefore, this auditory processing test battery cannot readily be used to diagnose central auditory processing disorders in patients with flat sensorineural hearing loss. At least, both adjustment of presentation level and additional correction are needed.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Auditory processing in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A.

HYPOTHESIS: It is unclear whether Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) disease, type 1A, causes auditory processing disorders. Therefore, auditory processing abilities were investigated in five CMT1A patients with normal hearing. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have failed to separate peripheral from central auditory processing disorders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five genetically confirmed CMT1A cases in patients with normal hearing underwent behavioral and objective testing. Pure tone audiometry, speech audiometry, and OAE assessment were followed-up by an auditory processing test battery comprising sentences-in-noise test, pattern recognition tests, words-in-noise test, dichotic digit test, filtered speech test, binaural fusion test, and categorical speech perception test. Subsequently, ABR and ERP measurements were conducted. RESULTS: Either the behavioral or objective test scores of 4 out of the 5 CMT1A patients did not differ significantly from those of subjects with normal hearing. Significantly lower scores of one patient on auditory processing tests and ABR measurements could be ascribed to subnormal hearing. CONCLUSION: The authors conclude that CMT1A patients with normal peripheral hearing have auditory processing abilities that were not indicative for an auditory processing disorder. Furthermore, the presence of a peripheral hearing loss complicates the interpretation of auditory processing abilities.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

PubMed2003

Auditory processing disorders in adults and children: evaluation of a test battery.

A Dutch test battery comprising six different tests for auditory processing disorders was evaluated in a group of 49 adults and children (age 8-57 years) with auditory complaints despite normal audiometric thresholds. Percentile scores were derived from normal control groups (n = 132) to determine whether a subject passed or failed a test. A composite score was computed to reflect a general score on all the auditory processing tests. In order to gain insight into underlying auditory processes, factor analysis was performed. Normal scores on all the tests were seen in five subjects. The remaining 44 subjects had at least one test score that was below the cut-off point (10th percentile). Factor analysis provided evidence for a model comprising four auditory components: auditory sequencing, word recognition in noise, auditory closure, and auditory patterning. This model could be useful in the interpretation of scoring patterns. Although there were some differences in scoring patterns between the children and adults, the test battery proved to be useful in both groups.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

PubMed2002

Age effects and normative data on a Dutch test battery for auditory processing disorders.

A test battery compiled to diagnose auditory processing disorders (APDs) in an adult population was used on a population of 9-16-year-old children. The battery consisted of eight tests (words -in noise, filtered speech, binaural fusion, dichotic digits, frequency and duration patterns, backward masking, categorical perception, digit span) and a questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were computed on data obtained from 75 children from primary school (age 9-12 years) and 30 adolescents from secondary school (age 14-16 years) with normal hearing and normal intelligence. Most test scores did not follow a normal distribution. Age effects were present in most tests, within the group as well as when children and adolescents were compared to adults. This suggests that maturation of auditory processing abilities takes place even during adolescence. Relative measures regarding ear differences and binaural versus monaural scores did not appear to be age-related. These measures might be useful in diagnosing APD, supplementary to the absolute measures. Factor analysis showed four components that address underlying processes. However, these results must be interpreted cautiously because the study did not include any subjects with APD.

Adolescent↗