Auditory Processing Disorder Overview and Management

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction

Auditory Processing Disorder is a somewhat lately identified problem that was initially noted in the United States of America in the mid-1960s. It is commonly referred to as (APD) and it results in difficulties in the utilization of acoustic information to commune and be taught in those afflicted by this disorder (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 41). This disorder is not normally an explicit disease; it is a collection of difficulties that are associated with various listening undertakings.

A large number of humans perceive sound well and thus do not give any further thought or reasoning to how they hear. This process begins with a complicated set of processes in the external, middle, and internal parts of the ear. These processes transmit resonance to the brain and the brain then interprets them so the individual can comprehend (Stark & Tallal, 1981, p. 114). This is what is referred to as listening.

Explanation of APD to the 14-year-old

Auditory Processing Disorder usually begins when an individual is young and is most of the time characterized by a child being unable to understand the sounds they hear. As mentioned earlier, the disorder is normally a set of difficulties that are explained as follows. Sound localization and lateralization is the capability of an individual to recognize where a sound or a noise has arisen in space. It is a very vital survival ability; it is important in making out a source of a sound, for instance, a moving vehicle (McFarland, 1995, p. 37). A person who is unable to discern this effectively has a higher risk of being run over than having this ability.

Auditory discrimination is the capability to make a distinction between various sounds. The description is mostly used in differentiating verbal communication sounds, for instance, speech sound /f/ from speech sound /v/. People with this disability usually experience problems in communication in the sense that they do not get what others are communicating to them while they at the same time cannot effectively communicate to others through both speech and writing (Estes, Jerger, & Jacobson, 2002, p. 59).

Auditory pattern identification is the capability to establish resemblances and disparities in patterns of sounds or noises. It thus means that persons who lack these skills experience problems in making out between similar and different sets of sounds. They also cannot demonstrate or explain to others effectively the similarities and differences between various patterns of sounds.

Temporal facets of auditory processing are the capability to series reverberations, put together a progression of sounds into utterances or some other form of significant arrangements, and pick out sounds as parts in cases where they speedily come after one another (Battin, Young & Burns, 2000, p. 7). Persons who are unable to sequence various sounds cannot also integrate any series of words into any arrangement and make out sounds as detached entities in instances where they follow one another quickly.

Auditory performance decrement is the capability to pick out verbal communication or other select sounds when any added sound or noise signal(s) is there. The competing signal or sound being attended to might be soft or loud. Auditory performance with degraded acoustic signals is the capability to make out a sound indication in which some of the data is omitted. A degraded signal can refer to one where sections of the resonance range have been obliterated, the maximum or lowly regularity constituents of the sound are done away with, or in instances where the sound is constricted in time (Young & Protti-Patterson, 1984, p. 253).

From these observations, it is quite clear that the mentioned aural tasks cannot be that straightforwardly measured up to what a teacher or a parent might detect in the school or at home. A teacher may make out that a child is unable to pay attention effectively in a room with lots of noise. On the other hand, a parent may find out that his or her child is easily diverted when two individuals are talking to him or her at the same time. However, these practical and real-life performances are not easy to examine independently, and due to the possibility of them more often than not being indicative of other problems unrelated to the hearing system, a qualified audiologist must be consulted to test any victim (Stark & Tallal, 1981, p. 116). This is because he or she will be able to use more objective standards and procedures that may or may not straightly match up to these discernible performances.

Causes of Auditory Processing Disorder

It is not fully understood what leads to this problem, but it has been observed that the condition can run down a family tree. It has also been noted that some children having this disorder at times show tiny disparities in the way that their brain cells, referred to as neurons join with one another and transmit messages between themselves (Torgesen & Houck, 1980, p. 141). This ends up making it difficult for sound to be transmitted to the brain regions that are responsible for language understanding. In uncommon instances, injuries to the head lead to this disorder.

Procedure for planning the test battery for diagnosing if the child has Auditory Processing Disorder

This procedure needs to be carried out by a qualified audiologist by use of standardized tests and procedures in an appropriate environment or set up. The function of a central auditory diagnostic examination is to inspect the reliability of the central auditory nervous system and find out if there is any trace of central auditory processing disorder and its extent if present (Musiek, Gollegly, & Ross, 1985, p. 49).

The professional carrying out this test needs to look at various aural performance sectors. The general description of auditory processing disorder serves as a leeway to the various auditory skills that are examined when the test is being carried out. In the case of children, the neuron-maturational condition of their aural nervous system needs to look at (Gunnerson & Finitzo, 1991, p. 1208). In instances of recognized neurological disorder(s) in either children or adults, emphasis needs to be laid on probable or established neurologic sites of dysfunction.

A central auditory test battery makes available data concerning both developed and adopted upsets of the central auditory nervous system, commonly referred to as CANS.

An audiologist needs to check up on various aural performance sectors (Torgesen & Houck, 1980, p.148). The set explanation of Auditory processing Disorder provides a guide to the kinds and sorts of aural skillfulness and behaviors that need to be evaluated in an aural investigative assessment. For cases of children, the neuron-maturational position of the aural nervous arrangement needs to be given consideration. An aural test battery gives data concerning both developed and acquired disorders of the aural system.

Test standards

Various standards need to be employed when out to establish the composition of an aural test battery and are as described here (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 48). It is vital that the professional who oversees and infers the aural processing test battery has familiarity from appropriate training to carry out the test.

The test battery procedure should not be test-driven and needs to be prompted by the referring ailment and the pertinent data availed to the aural professional. Examinations with fine dependability and soundness that also display elevated levels of sensitivity, particularity, and effectiveness need to be opted for (Torgesen & Houck, 1980, p.150). It is also important that the aural test battery takes account of gauges that look at various central progressions.

The tests need to consist of both oral and nonverbal spurs to check up various elements of aural processing and various levels of the auditory nervous setup. In cases whereby tests using verbal spurs are unavailable in the victim’s indigenous language then reliance needs to be pegged on nonverbal spurs (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 49).

The testing professional needs to be responsive to the traits of the person under test. These traits include weaknesses, attention, among others. Victims who are treated successfully for disorders such as attention and nervousness need to be examined under the control of their prescription.

Another step that the testing professional needs to evaluate is the examination of prescriptive data and history attentively to be certain that the test is suitable for the victim to be tested.

The influence of rational age on examination results is also another area on which the audiologist needs to be responsive. Carrying out examinations on children below the rational age of seven years is normally faced by assignment complexity and operation inconsistency. These at times render the obtained outcomes questionable. Nevertheless, there also exist exemptions to this wide-ranging occurrence (Gunnerson & Finitzo, 1991, p. 1209). This is usually from watchful assessment of the test’s obligations and the victim’s abilities and in instances where examinations are specially crafted for use with younger individuals. Informal evaluation is highly advocated in cases where proper tests of the auditory processing disorder are unavailable for young children or even in cases of adults whereby testing the condition is difficult. It is also important to note that neuron maturation, victim condition, and other cognitive aspects will influence the results of tests when carried out on victims below the age of ten years. It is thus important that professionals in this field carry out and interpret tests in a way that is suitable to the child under test.

The examination procedures need to be steady with the processes stated in the initial study of the test or as directed in the examination instruction manual. Examination procedures consist of analysis situations, guidelines, scoring and scrutiny, and the submission of fortification which consists of a response to the victim under test (Battin, Young & Burns, 2000, p. 8). Other routine variables also need to be carefully adhered to.

The period in which the test takes place needs to be fitting to the individual’s concentration, enthusiasm, and energy level. It needs to allow the evaluation of various fundamental aural processes (Battin, Young & Burns, 2000, p. 9). The professional carrying out the examination should constantly keep an eye on the victim’s measure of concentration and initiative and do what he or she can to keep recommended levels of motivation throughout the test procedure.

In instances where talking or tongue impairment or rational, mental, and any other deficiencies are detected or suspected, then a recommendation to appropriate experts needs to be carried out.

Examination outcomes of an individual should be looked at as one section of a many-sided assessment of the person’s complaints and warning signs. Other forms of information that need to be assessed are methodical inspection of the victim in day-to-day undertakings, personality evaluations, recognized and unrecognized evaluations conducted by other experts, among others (McFarland, 1995, p. 42). It is also of the essence to substantiate examination outcomes by connecting them to the victim’s most important warning signs or complaints like trouble hearing with one ear than the other and various other such problems.

Management plan to help a victim with an auditory processing disorder

Any intercession for auditory processing disorder needs to be put into operation as soon as it is made out in the victim so that to make the most of the flexibility of the central nervous system, capitalize on successful restorative results and lessen lingering practical deficiencies (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 50). If the probable impact of auditory processing disorder on paying attention, communication, and educational triumph is anything to go by, it is of the essence that intercession is carried out comprehensively.

The management program in school involves various elements as discussed here. The pupil should begin with sitting near his or her teacher’s desk in the classroom such that it helps him or her in lip reading and any other prompts.

The child can be provided with a listening piece of equipment to enhance the clarity of speech in noisy environments (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 51). These devices may include personal frequency modulation systems and sound field systems in areas as classrooms.

Teachers are also a vital inclusion in this management setup. They need to be attentive and establish whether the pupil is looking and attentive during the times when instructions are being spelled out (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 52). This is especially important in cases where the teacher paces the room while talking.

Teachers or other instructors also need to go ahead and find out whether the pupil has comprehended the tutoring (Battin, Young & Burns, 2000, p. 11). For pupils who have attained the right age, teachers can avail to them information on paper which is important in strengthening spoken directives.

The classroom setup also needs to be geared toward reduced noise levels by provisions like carpeting, rubber feet of seats and desks, lamina ceiling boards, among others.

The management program also needs to be implemented at home and the victim’s family should be very instrumental in supporting the child to carry out listening learning workouts as instructed by an auditory professional. When necessary, the family should also keep verifying if the child is looking and paying attention when required (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 52). Whenever trying to communicate with the child, all members need to ensure that surrounding noise such as from television or radio is minimized.

The hearing clinic or hospital that diagnoses this disparity in a child also has an important management role to play. The professional(s) need to provide a guidance program and plan to enable the young one to comprehend better while paying attention (American Journal of Audiology, 1996, p. 54). They also should avail parental prop up plans.

Reference List

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Task Force on Central Auditory Processing Consensus Development. (l996). Current status of research and implications for clinical practice. American Journal of Audiology, 5 (2), 41-54.

Battin, R., Young, M., and Burns, M. (2000). Use of Fast For Word in Remediation of CAPD. Audiology Today, 2000.

Estes, I., Jerger, J., & Jacobson, G. (2002). Reversal of hemispheric asymmetry on auditory tasks in children who are poor listeners. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 13, 59–71.

Gunnerson, A. & Finitzo, T. (1991). Conductive hearing loss during infancy: Effects on later auditory brainstem electrophysiology. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 1207-1215.

McFarland, J., & Cacace, T. (1995). Modality specificity as a criterion for diagnosing central auditory processing disorders. American Journal of Audiology, 4, 36–48.

Musiek, F., Gollegly, K., and Ross, M. (1985). Profiles of types of central auditory processing disorder in children with learning disabilities. Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders, 9, 43-63.

Stark, R. and Tallal, P. (1981). Selection of children with specific language deficits. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 46, 114-122.

Tallal, P. and Piercy, M. (1981). Speech acoustic-cue discrimination abilities of normally developing and language-impaired children. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 568-578.

Torgesen, J. and Houck, G. (1980). Processing deficiencies in learning disabled children who perform poorly on the digit span task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 141-160.

Young, M. and Protti-Patterson, E. (1984). Management of Central Auditory Problems. Seminars in Hearing, 5 (3), 251-261.

Click Here To Order Now!