Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Efficacy of Computerized Auditory Training in Kannada Speaking Children with Hearing Impairment

Manohar Nanjundaswamy, Prashanth Prabhu, Husna Firdose, Revathi K. R., Raghavendra G. N., Madhuri Sharma

Abstract


Listening training is one of the major aspects of rehabilitation in children with hearing impairment fitted with amplification devices. It provides children the opportunity to learn to listen and communicate. In the current scenario, this happens by one to one therapy provided by skilled and train clinicians at institute or clinic level. In order to move one step ahead and utilize the current technology, there are computer-based rehabilitation programs for hearing loss in the market. The present study aims to quantify the efficacy of one such program called Computerized Auditory training for Kannada speaking children with Hearing Impairment. Twenty participants with hearing impairment in the age range of 2 to 7 years (3.8 years) were considered for the study. Out of them, ten were included in the experimental group while the other into the control group. The control group had children who attended regular listening training without software training. The second group attended regular listening training and also training with software which is the experimental group. Listening age was determined pre-therapy and also after one month of therapy (3 sessions of 45 min/week) for all the participants to determine the efficacy. The result showed significant improvement in the listening age of the experimental group. Also, there was a positive feedback from the caregivers about the training provided by the software which added to the efficacy of the same. A new start can be given to the auditory rehabilitation of children with hearing impairment by using computer-based training program.

Keywords: Computerized training, auditory training, hearing impaired, Kannada

Full Text:

PDF

References


World Health Organization (WHO). WHO global estimates on prevalence of hearing loss. Mortality and burden of diseases and prevention of blindness and deafness. WHO; 2012.

Fu QJ, Nogaki G, Galvin JJ. 3rd. Auditory training with spectrally shifted speech: implications for cochlear implant patient auditory rehabilitation. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2005; 6: 180–189p.

Ross M. Home-based auditory and speechreading training: a review of four programs. Hear Loss Mag. 2005; 26:30–34p.

Fu QJ, Galvin JJ. 3rd. Perceptual learning and auditory training in cochlear implant recipients. Trends Amplif. 2007; 11:193–205p.

Sweetow RW, Sabes JH. Listening and communication enhancement (LACE). Semin Hear. 2007; 28:133–141p.

Sweetow RW, Sabes JH. Technologic advances in aural rehabilitation: applications and innovative methods of service delivery. Trends Amplif. 2007; 11:101–111.

Sweetow RW. The need for auditory training. ASHA Leader. 2008; 13:5–6p.

Boothroyd A. Adapting to change hearing: the potential role of formal training. J Am Acad Audiol. 2010; 21:601–611p.

Pallarito K. Retraining the brain when hearing aids aren’t enough. Hear J. 2011; 64:25–34p.

Olson A, Canada T. Using computerized auditory training clinically for adults with cochlear implants. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; [Online]; 2013. Available from http://www.asha. org/aud/articles/auditory-training adults-cochlearimplants/.

Sweetow R, Palmer CV. Efficacy of individual auditory training in adults: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005; 16:494–504p.

Sabes JH, Sweetow RW. Variables predicting outcomes on listening and communication enhancement (LACE) training. Int J Audiol. 2007; 46:374–383p.

Wu JL, Yang HM, Lin YH, Fu QJ. Effects of computer-assisted speech training on Mandarin-speaking hearing-impaired children. Audiol Neurotol. 2007; 12: 307–312p.

Fitzpatrick EM, Brewster L. Adult cochlear implantation in Canada: results of a survey. Can J Speech Lang Pathol Audiol. 2010; 34:290–296p.

Bloom S. Technologic advances raise prospects for a resurgence in use of auditory training. Hear J. 2004; 57:19–20p.

Hull RH. A brief treatise on the service of aural rehabilitation. Hear J. 2011; 64:14–18p.

Jain A. Apps marketplaces and the telecom value chain. IEEE Wireless Commun. 2011.

Bellman S, Potter RF. Treleaven-Hassard S, et al. The effectiveness of branded mobile phone apps. J Interact Market. 2011; 25: 191–200p.

Feijoo C, Gomez-Barroso J-L, Aguado J-M, et al. Mobile gaming: industry challenges and policy implications. Telecommun Policy. 2012; 36:212–221p.

Stacey PC, Raine CH, O’Donoghue GM, et al. Effectiveness of computer-based auditory training for adult users of cochlear implants. Int J Audiol. 2010; 49:347–356p.

Nanjundaswamy M, Prabhu P, Rajanna RK, Ningegowda RG, Firdose H, Sharma M. Benefits of computerized auditory training software for Kannada speaking children with hearing impairment – parent’s perspective. Hearing Balance Commun. 2017; 15:227–234p.

Sweetow RW, Sabes JH. The need for and development of an adaptive listening and communication enhancement (LACE™) program. J Am Acad Audiol. 2006; 17:538–558p.

Burk MH, Humes LE. Effects of training on speech recognition performance in noise using lexically hard words. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007; 50: 25–40p.

Byrne D, Dillon H, Tran K, Arlinger S, Wilbraham K, Cox R, Ludvigsen C. An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1994; 96:2108–2120p.

American National Standards Institute (ANSI).American national standards for Maximum Permissible Ambient Noise Levels for Audiometric Test Rooms, S3.1–1991.

Cochlear Limited. Listen Learn and Talk, Another Cochlear Innovation, 2nd edition. Aus: SOS Printing Group; 2005.

Martin M. Software-based auditory training program found to reduce hearing aid return rate. Hear J. 2007; 60:32–35p.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.37628/ijbme.v3i2.499

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.