Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 22(01): 088-093
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1602797
Systematic Review
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Computer-Based Auditory Training Programs for Children with Hearing Impairment – A Scoping Review

Manohar Nanjundaswamy
1   Department of Electronics, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing Ringgold Standard Institution, Mysore, Karnataka, India
,
Prashanth Prabhu
2   Department of Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing Ringgold Standard Institution, Mysore, Karnataka, India
,
Revathi Kittur Rajanna
2   Department of Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing Ringgold Standard Institution, Mysore, Karnataka, India
,
Raghavendra Gulaganji Ningegowda
1   Department of Electronics, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing Ringgold Standard Institution, Mysore, Karnataka, India
,
Madhuri Sharma
1   Department of Electronics, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing Ringgold Standard Institution, Mysore, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

03 January 2017

16 February 2017

Publication Date:
28 April 2017 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Communication breakdown, a consequence of hearing impairment (HI), is being fought by fitting amplification devices and providing auditory training since the inception of audiology. The advances in both audiology and rehabilitation programs have led to the advent of computer-based auditory training programs (CBATPs).

Objective To review the existing literature documenting the evidence-based CBATPs for children with HIs. Since there was only one such article, we also chose to review the commercially available CBATPs for children with HI. The strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature were reviewed in order to improve further researches.

Data Synthesis Google Scholar and PubMed databases were searched using various combinations of keywords. The participant, intervention, control, outcome and study design (PICOS) criteria were used for the inclusion of articles. Out of 124 article abstracts reviewed, 5 studies were shortlisted for detailed reading. One among them satisfied all the criteria, and was taken for review. The commercially available programs were chosen based on an extensive search in Google. The reviewed article was well-structured, with appropriate outcomes. The commercially available programs cover many aspects of the auditory training through a wide range of stimuli and activities.

Conclusions There is a dire need for extensive research to be performed in the field of CBATPs to establish their efficacy, also to establish them as evidence-based practices.

Keywords

auditory training - computer-based - auditory rehabilitation - software
 

  • References

  • 1 Organization WH. WHO global estimates on prevalence of hearing loss. Mortal Burd Dis Prev Blind Deaf WHO; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Bloom S. Technologic advances raise prospects for a resurgence in use of auditory training. Hear J 2004; 57 (08) 19-20
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Fu QJ, Nogaki G, Galvin III JJ. Auditory training with spectrally shifted speech: implications for cochlear implant patient auditory rehabilitation. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2005; 6 (02) 180-189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Boothroyd A. Adapting to changed hearing: the potential role of formal training. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21 (09) 601-611
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Boothroyd A. Adult aural rehabilitation: what is it and does it work?. Trends Amplif 2007; 11 (02) 63-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Fu QJ, Galvin III JJ. Perceptual learning and auditory training in cochlear implant recipients. Trends Amplif 2007; 11 (03) 193-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Martin M. Software-based auditory training program found to reduce hearing aid return rate. Hear J 2007; 60 (08) 32
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sweetow RW, Sabes JH. The need for and development of an adaptive Listening and Communication Enhancement (LACE) Program. J Am Acad Audiol 2006; 17 (08) 538-558
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Pallarito K. Retraining the brain when hearing aids arenʼt enough. Hear J 2011; 64 (08) 25
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Fitzpatrick EM, Brewster L. Adult cochlear implantation in Canada: results of a survey. Can J Speech Lang Pathol Audiol 2010; 34: 290-296
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Hull RH. A brief treatise on the service of aural rehabilitation. Hear J 2011; 64 (04) 14
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Jain A. Apps marketplaces and the telecom value chain. IEEE Wirel Commun 2011; 18 (04) 4-5
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Bellman S, Potter RF, Treleaven-Hassard S, Robinson JA, Varan D. The Effectiveness of Branded Mobile Phone Apps. J Interact Market 2011; 25 (04) 191-200
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Feijoo C, Gómez-Barroso J-L, Aguado J-M, Ramos S. Mobile gaming: Industry challenges and policy implications. Telecomm Policy 2012; 36 (03) 212-221
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Stacey PC, Raine CH, O'Donoghue GM, Tapper L, Twomey T, Summerfield AQ. Effectiveness of computer-based auditory training for adult users of cochlear implants. Int J Audiol 2010; 49 (05) 347-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Sweetow R, Palmer CV. Efficacy of individual auditory training in adults: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (07) 494-504
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Brouns K, Refaie AE, Pryce H. Auditory training and adult rehabilitation: a critical review of the evidence. Glob J Health Sci 2011; 3 (01) 49-63
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Pizarek R, Shafiro V, McCarthy P. , et al. Effect of Computerized Auditory Training on Speech Perception of Adults With Hearing Impairment. Perspect Aural Rehabil Its Instrum 2013; 20 (03) 91
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Henshaw H, Ferguson MA. Efficacy of individual computer-based auditory training for people with hearing loss: a systematic review of the evidence. PLoS One 2013; 8 (05) e62836
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. ; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151 (04) 264-269 , W64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Glyde H, Cameron S, Dillon H, Hickson L. Remediation of spatial processing deficits in hearing-impaired children and adults. J Am Acad Audiol 2014; 25 (06) 549-561
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Cameron S, Dillon H. Development and evaluation of the LiSN & learn auditory training software for deficit-specific remediation of binaural processing deficits in children: preliminary findings. J Am Acad Audiol 2011; 22 (10) 678-696
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Cameron S, Glyde H, Dillon H. Efficacy of the LiSN & Learn auditory training software: randomized blinded controlled study. Audiology Res 2012; 2 (01) e15
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Gatehouse S, Noble W. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 2004; 43 (02) 85-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Anderson KL, Smaldino JJ. The Listening Inventory For Education: an efficacy tool. Hear J 1998; 16 (07) 494-504
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Bench J, Kowal A, Bamford J. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol 1979; 13 (03) 108-112
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Hornickel J, Chandrasekaran B, Zecker S, Kraus N. Auditory brainstem measures predict reading and speech-in-noise perception in school-aged children. Behav Brain Res 2011; 216 (02) 597-605
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Zhang M, Miller A, Campbell MM. Overview of nine computerized, home-based auditory-training programs for adult cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol 2014; 25 (04) 405-413
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Yoshinaga-Itano C, Sedey AL, Coulter DK, Mehl AL. Language of early- and later-identified children with hearing loss. Pediatrics 1998; 102 (05) 1161-1171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T. The time course of auditory perceptual learning: neurophysiological changes during speech-sound training. Neuroreport 1998; 9 (16) 3557-3560
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Stevens C, Fanning J, Coch D, Sanders L, Neville H. Neural mechanisms of selective auditory attention are enhanced by computerized training: electrophysiological evidence from language-impaired and typically developing children. Brain Res 2008; 1205: 55-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar