Overview of Central Auditory Processing Deficits in Older Adults

Abstract

Although there are many reported age-related declines in the human body, the notion that a central auditory processing deficit exists in older adults has not always been clear. Hearing loss and both structural and functional central nervous system changes with advancing age are contributors to how we listen, hear, and process auditory information. Even older adults with normal or near normal hearing sensitivity may exhibit age-related central auditory processing deficits as measured behaviorally and/or electrophysiologically. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of assessment and rehabilitative approaches for central auditory processing deficits in older adults. It is hoped that the outcome of the information presented here will help clinicians with older adult patients who do not exhibit the typical auditory processing behaviors exhibited by others at the same age and with comparable hearing sensitivity all in the absence of other health-related conditions.

Keywords

Central auditory processing deficit - central presbycusis - age-related - cognition - speech-in-noise - dichotic - temporal processing

• References

• 1 Anderson S, Kraus N. Auditory training: evidence for neural plasticity in older adults. Perspect Hear Hear Disord Res Res Diagn 2013; 17: 37-57
• 2 Humes LE, Dubno JR, Gordon-Salant S , et al. Central presbycusis: a review and evaluation of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (8) 635-666
• 3 Willott JF. Aging and the Auditory System: Anatomy, Physiology, and Psychophysics. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group; 1991
• 4 Fitzgibbons PJ, Gordon-Salant S. Behavioral studies with aging humans: hearing sensitivity and psychoacoustics. In: Gordon-Salant S, Frisina RD, Popper AN, Fay RR, , eds. The Aging Auditory System. New York, NY: Springer; 2010: 111-134
• 5 Humes LE, Dubno JR. Factors affecting speech understanding in older adults. In: Gordon-Salant S, Frisina RD, Popper AN, Fay RR, , eds. The Aging Auditory System. New York, NY: Springer; 2010: 211-257
• 6 American Academy of Audiology. American Academy of Audiology: Clinical practice guidelines: diagnosis, treatment and management of children and adults with central auditory processing disorder. 2010. Available at: http://www.audiology.org/publications-resources/document-library/central-auditory-processing-disorder . Accessed June 15, 2015
• 7 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (Central) auditory processing disorders [Technical Report]. 2005. Available at: http://www.asha.org/policy/TR2005-00043/ . Accessed June 3, 2015
• 8 Bellis T. General principles of CAPD management. In: Assessment and Management of Central Auditory Processing Disorders in the Educational Setting: From Science to Practice, 2nd ed. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2002. 324. 336-337
• 9 Salthouse TA. The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychol Rev 1996; 103 (3) 403-428
• 10 Pickora-Fuller MK. Processing speed and timing in aging adults: psychoacoustics, speech perception, and comprehension. Int J Audiol 2003; 42 (Suppl. 01) S59-S67
• 11 Akeroyd MA. Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol 2008; 47 (Suppl. 02) S53-S71
• 12 Holt LL, Lotto AJ. Speech perception within an auditory cognitive science framework. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2008; 17 (1) 42-46
• 13 McCoy SL, Tun PA, Cox LC, Colangelo M, Stewart RA, Wingfield A. Hearing loss and perceptual effort: downstream effects on older adults' memory for speech. Q J Exp Psychol A 2005; 58 (1) 22-33
• 14 Rönnberg J, Rudner M, Foo C, Lunner T. Cognition counts: a working memory system for ease of language understanding (ELU). Int J Audiol 2008; 47 (Suppl. 02) S99-S105
• 15 Rönnberg J, Rudner M, Lunner T, Zekveld AA. When cognition kicks in: working memory and speech understanding in noise. Noise Health 2010; 12 (49) 263-269
• 16 Tun PA, Benichov J, Wingfield A. Response latencies in auditory sentence comprehension: effects of linguistic versus perceptual challenge. Psychol Aging 2010; 25 (3) 730-735
• 17 Bocca E, Calearo C, Cassinari V. A new method for testing hearing in temporal lobe tumours; preliminary report. Acta Otolaryngol 1954; 44 (3) 219-221
• 18 Bocca E, Calearo C, Cassinari V, Migliavacca F. Testing “cortical” hearing in temporal lobe tumours. Acta Otolaryngol 1955; 45 (4) 289-304
• 19 Ben-David BM, Tse VY, Schneider BA. Does it take older adults longer than younger adults to perceptually segregate a speech target from a background masker?. Hear Res 2012; 290 (1–2) 55-63
• 20 Fostick L, Ben-Artzi E, Babkoff H. Aging and speech perception: beyond hearing threshold and cognitive ability. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol 2013; 24 (3) 175-183
• 21 Pronk M, Deeg DJ, Festen JM , et al. Decline in older persons' ability to recognize speech in noise: the influence of demographic, health-related, environmental, and cognitive factors. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (6) 722-732
• 22 Anderson S, Parbery-Clark A, Yi HG, Kraus N. A neural basis of speech-in-noise perception in older adults. Ear Hear 2011; 32 (6) 750-757
• 23 Schoof T, Rosen S. The role of auditory and cognitive factors in understanding speech in noise by normal-hearing older listeners. Front Aging Neurosci 2014; 6: 307
• 24 Gates GA, Feeney MP, Mills D. Cross-sectional age-changes of hearing in the elderly. Ear Hear 2008; 29 (6) 865-874
• 25 Vaughan N, Storzbach D, Furukawa I. Investigation of potential cognitive tests for use with older adults in audiology clinics. J Am Acad Audiol 2008; 19 (7) 533-541 , quiz 579–580
• 26 Golding M, Taylor A, Cupples L, Mitchell P. Odds of demonstrating auditory processing abnormality in the average older adult: the Blue Mountains Hearing Study. Ear Hear 2006; 27 (2) 129-138
• 27 Moore DR, Edmondson-Jones M, Dawes P , et al. Relation between speech-in-noise threshold, hearing loss and cognition from 40–69 years of age. PLoS ONE 2014; 9 (9) e107720
• 28 Wong PCM, Ettlinger M, Sheppard JP, Gunasekera GM, Dhar S. Neuroanatomical characteristics and speech perception in noise in older adults. Ear Hear 2010; 31 (4) 471-479
• 29 Killion MC, Niquette PA, Gudmundsen GI, Revit LJ, Banerjee S. Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2004; 116 (4 Pt 1) 2395-2405
• 30 Sparks R, Geschwind N. Dichotic listening in man after section of neocortical commissures. Cortex 1968; 4: 3-16
• 31 Musiek FE, Kurdziel-Schwan S, Kibbe KS, Gollegly KM, Baran JA, Rintelmann WF. The dichotic rhyme task: results in split-brain patients. Ear Hear 1989; 10 (1) 33-39
• 32 Musiek F, Gollegly K, Baran J. Myelination of the corpus callosum and auditory processing problems in children: theoretical and clinical correlates. Semin Hear 1984; 5: 231-241
• 33 Bellis TJ, Wilber LA. Effects of aging and gender on interhemispheric function. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2001; 44 (2) 246-263
• 34 Musiek FE. Assessment of central auditory dysfunction: the dichotic digit test revisited. Ear Hear 1983; 4 (2) 79-83
• 35 Jerger J, Martin J. Dichotic listening tests in the audiological assessment of elderly person. Journal of Audiological Medicine 2006; 21: 15-23
• 36 Gootjes L, Bouma A, Van Strien JW, Van Schijndel R, Barkhof F, Scheltens P. Corpus callosum size correlates with asymmetric performance on a dichotic listening task in healthy aging but not in Alzheimer's disease. Neuropsychologia 2006; 44 (2) 208-217
• 37 Boettcher FA. Presbyacusis and the auditory brainstem response. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2002; 45 (6) 1249-1261
• 38 Dreschler WA, Plomp R. Relations between psychophysical data and speech perception for hearing-impaired subjects. II. J Acoust Soc Am 1985; 78 (4) 1261-1270
• 39 Schneider B. Psychoacoustics and aging: implications for everyday listening. J Speech Lang Pathol Audiol 1997; 21: 111-124
• 40 Goŕdon-Salant S, Fitzgibbons PJ. Temporal factors and speech recognition performance in young and elderly listeners. J Speech Hear Res 1993; 36 (6) 1276-1285
• 41 National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. NIDCD Fact Sheet/Hearing and Balance. Age-Related Hearing Loss. Available at: http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/staticresources/health/hearing/NIDCD-Age-Related-Hearing-Loss.pdf . Accessed June 11, 2015
• 42 Ruggles D, Bharadwaj H, Shinn-Cunningham BG. Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011; 108 (37) 15516-15521
• 43 Moore BC, Peters RW, Glasberg BR. Detection of temporal gaps in sinusoids by elderly subjects with and without hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 92 (4 Pt 1) 1923-1932
• 44 Schneider BA, Pichora-Fuller K, Daneman M. Effects of Senescent Changes in Audition and Cognition on Spoken Language Comprehension. In: Gordon-Salant S, , RD. (Ed.), The Aging Auditory System. New York: Spring; 2010: 167-210
• 45 Snell KB. Age-related changes in temporal gap detection. J Acoust Soc Am 1997; 101 (4) 2214-2220
• 46 Strouse A, Ashmead DH, Ohde RN, Grantham DW. Temporal processing in the aging auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am 1998; 104 (4) 2385-2399
• 47 Schneider BA, Pichora-Fuller MK, Kowalchuk D, Lamb M. Gap detection and the precedence effect in young and old adults. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95 (2) 980-991
• 48 Gallun FJ, McMillan GP, Molis MR, Kampel SD, Dann SM, Konrad-Martin DL. Relating age and hearing loss to monaural, bilateral, and binaural temporal sensitivity. Front Neurosci 2014; 8: 172
• 49 John AB, Hall III JW, Kreisman BM. Effects of advancing age and hearing loss on gaps-in-noise test performance. Am J Audiol 2012; 21 (2) 242-250
• 50 Musiek FE, Shinn JB, Jirsa R, Bamiou DE, Baran JA, Zaida E. GIN (Gaps-in-Noise) test performance in subjects with confirmed central auditory nervous system involvement. Ear Hear 2005; 26 (6) 608-618
• 51 Phillips SL, Gordon-Salant S, Fitzgibbons PJ, Yeni-Komshian G. Frequency and temporal resolution in elderly listeners with good and poor word recognition. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2000; 43 (1) 217-228
• 52 Humes LE, Busey TA, Craig J, Kewley-Port D. Are age-related changes in cognitive function driven by age-related changes in sensory processing?. Atten Percept Psychophys 2013; 75 (3) 508-524
• 53 Walton J, Orlando M, Burkard R. Auditory brainstem response forward-masking recovery functions in older humans with normal hearing. Hear Res 1999; 127 (1–2) 86-94
• 54 Poth EA, Boettcher FA, Mills JH, Dubno JR. Auditory brainstem responses in younger and older adults for broadband noises separated by a silent gap. Hear Res 2001; 161 (1-2) 81-86
• 55 Vander Werff KR, Burns KS. Brain stem responses to speech in younger and older adults. Ear Hear 2011; 32 (2) 168-180
• 56 Russo N, Nicol T, Musacchia G, Kraus N. Brainstem responses to speech syllables. Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 115 (9) 2021-2030
• 57 Kovacií J, Lajtman Z, Ozegović I, Knezević P, Carić T, Vlasić A. Investigation of auditory brainstem function in elderly diabetic patients with presbycusis. Int Tinnitus J 2009; 15 (1) 79-82
• 58 Weihing J, Musiek F. The influence of aging on interaural asymmetries in middle latency response amplitude. J Am Acad Audiol 2014; 25 (4) 324-343
• 59 Azumi T, Nakashima K, Takahashi K. Aging effects on auditory middle latency responses. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 1995; 35 (7) 397-401
• 60 Chambers RD. Differential age effects for components of the adult auditory middle latency response. Hear Res 1992; 58 (2) 123-131
• 61 Jerger J, Lew HL. Principles and clinical applications of auditory evoked potentials in the geriatric population. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2004; 15 (1) 235-250 , viii–ix
• 62 Bertoli S, Smurzynski J, Probst R. Temporal resolution in young and elderly subjects as measured by mismatch negativity and a psychoacoustic gap detection task. Clin Neurophysiol 2002; 113 (3) 396-406
• 63 Lister JJ, Maxfield ND, Pitt GJ, Gonzalez VB. Auditory evoked response to gaps in noise: older adults. Int J Audiol 2011; 50 (4) 211-225
• 64 Bellis TJ, Nicol T, Kraus N. Aging affects hemispheric asymmetry in the neural representation of speech sounds. J Neurosci 2000; 20 (2) 791-797
• 65 Polich J. Clinical application of the P300 event-related brain potential. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2004; 15 (1) 133-161
• 66 Stenklev NC, Laukli E. Cortical cognitive potentials in elderly persons. J Am Acad Audiol 2004; 15 (6) 401-413
• 67 Baran J. Managing auditory processing disorders in adolescents and adults. Semin Hear 2002; 23 (4) 327-336
• 68 Chermak GD, Musiek FE. Auditory training: principles and approaches for remediating and managing auditory processing disorders. Semin Hear 2002; 23: 297-308
• 69 Martin JS, Jerger JF. Some effects of aging on central auditory processing. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42 (4) (Suppl. 02) 25-44
• 70 Kricos PB. Audiologic management of older adults with hearing loss and compromised cognitive/psychoacoustic auditory processing capabilities. Trends Amplif 2006; 10 (1) 1-28
• 71 Holmes AE. Bilateral amplification for the elderly: are two aids better than one?. Int J Audiol 2003; 42 (Suppl. 02) S63-S67
• 72 Walden TC, Walden BE. Unilateral versus bilateral amplification for adults with impaired hearing. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (8) 574-584
• 73 Heine C, Browning CJ. Communication and psychosocial consequences of sensory loss in older adults: overview and rehabilitation directions. Disabil Rehabil 2002; 24 (15) 763-773
• 74 Kiessling J, Pichora-Fuller MK, Gatehouse S , et al. Candidature for and delivery of audiological services: special needs of older people. Int J Audiol 2003; 42 (2) (Suppl. 02) S92-S101
• 75 Musiek FE, Weihing JA, Lau C. Dichotic interaural intensity difference (DIID) training: a review of existing research and future directions. J Acad Reh Audiol 2008; 41: 51-65
• 76 Henderson Sabes J, Sweetow RW. Variables predicting outcomes on listening and communication enhancement (LACE) training. Int J Audiol 2007; 46 (7) 374-383
• 77 Anderson S, White-Schwoch T, Choi HJ, Kraus N. Partial maintenance of auditory-based cognitive training benefits in older adults.. Neuropsychologia 2014; 62: 286-296