Speech Perception Assessment Practices Among Audiologists in India: A Preliminary Survey
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12970/2311-1917.2015.03.02.2Keywords:
Speech perception, India, presentation level, monitored live voice, signal-to-noise ratio.Abstract
Assessment of speech perception is an important aspect of clinical audiology practice. The profession of audiology is about 50 years old in India. However, there is no published information available about speech perception assessment practices implemented by audiologists in the country. The present study is a small scale survey of audiologists involving 59 respondents working in various settings in India. The survey was conducted via e-mail and social networking website. Analysis indicates that about 70% respondents conduct speech testing routinely, though only about 50% test through audition-only and through the audiometer. The results indicate considerable variability in aspects such as presentation level, speech stimuli and tests used, setting used for testing, and Signal-to-Noise Ratio used for testing in noise. 85% respondents prefer presenting stimuli through monitored live voice for children. Word Recognition Score is the most commonly used measure, while HINT and SPIN are the tests commonly used for testing in noise. A majority of respondents feel the need for developing language-independent test material for both children and adults. Reportedly, the major impediments in conducting speech testing include non-availability of standard sound treated rooms, lack of access to sophisticated audiometers, lack of time and non-availability of standard test material in the various languages spoken in the country. The main limitation of the survey is that 73% of the respondents were from western India and hence the results cannot be generalized to the population of audiologists across the country. Despite its limitations, this study may be considered as a preliminary survey providing valuable information about speech perception assessment practices among audiologists in India.
References
Ryalls JH, Ryalls J, Ryalls. A Basic Introduction to Speech Perception. San Diego, CA: Cengage Learning 1996.
Gierut JA, Pisoni DB. Speech Perception. In Lass NJ, McReynolds LV, Northern JL, Yoder DE, Eds. Handbook of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology. Philadelphia: BC Decker Inc. 1988; pp. 253-274.
Geers A, Moog J. Evaluating the Benefits of Cochlear Implants in an Educational Setting. American Journal of Otolaryngology 1991; 12(Suppl.): 116-125.
Boothroyd A. Assessment of Speech Perception Capacity in Profoundly Deaf Children. The American Journal of Otology 1991; 12(Suppl.): 67-72.
Mendel L, Danhauer JL. Audiologic Evaluation and Management and Speech Perception Assessment. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group 1997.
Dillon H, Ching, T. What Makes a Good Speech Test? In Plant G, Spens K, Eds. Profound Deafness and Speech Communication. London: Whurr. 1995; pp. 305-344.
Blamey PJ, Sarant JZ, Paatsch LE, Barry JG, Bow CP, Wales RJ, Wright M, Psarros C, Rattigan K, Tooher R. Relationships among speech perception, production, language, hearing loss, and age in children with impaired hearing. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2001; Vol. 44: 264-285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2001/022)
Ling D, Ling AP. Aural Habilitation: The foundations of verbal learning. Washington DC: AG Bell Association of Deaf 1978.
Moog JS, Geers AE. (1990). Early Speech Perception Test for Profoundly Hearing Impaired Children. St. Louis: Central Institute for the Deaf 1990. Cited in Kirk KI, Diefendorf AO, Pisoni DB, Robbins AM. Assessing Speech Perception in Children. In Mendel L, Danhauer JL. Audiologic Evaluation and Management and Speech Perception Assessment. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group 1997; pp. 101-132.
Ross M, Lerman J. A Picture Identification Test for Hearing Impaired Children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1979; 13: 44-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1301.44
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 2006. Preferred Practice Patterns for the Profession of Audiology. www.asha.org/policy/pp2006-00274.htm (accessed January 11, 2015).
Indian Speech and Hearing Association 2011. Scope of Practice in Audiology and Speech-language Pathology. www.ishaindia.org.in (accessed January 22, 2015).
Cochlear Implant Group of India (2011). Recommended Practice Guidelines for Cochlear Implantation. 2nd ed. www.cigi.in (accessed January 2, 2015).
Manchaiah VKC, Reddy S, Chundu S. Audiology in India. Audiology Today 2009; 21(6): 38-44.
Easwar V, Boothalingam S, Chundu S, Manchaiah VKC, Ismail SM. Audiological Practice in India: An Internet-Based Survey of Audiologists. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery 2013; 65(Suppl 3): S636-S644.
Estabrooks W. Cochlear Implants for Kids. Washington DC: The AG Bell Association of Deaf. Inc. 1998.
Plant G, Moore A. A Common Objects Token (COT) test: A sentence test for profoundly hearing impaired children, Australian Journal of Audiology 1992; 14(2): 76-83.
Robbins AM, Renshaw JJ, Berry SW. Evaluation of meaningful auditory integration in profoundly hearing-impaired children, American Journal of Otolaryngology 1991; 12(Suppl): 114-50.
Zimmerman-Phillips S, Robbins AM, Osberger MJ. Assessing cochlear implant benefit in very young children. Annals of Otology Rhinology and Laryngology Suppl 2000; 109(12): 42-43.
Ching TYC, Hill M. The Parents’ Evaluation of Aural/Oral Performance of Children (PEACH) Scale: Normative Data. Journal of American Academy of Audiology 2007; 18: 220-235. http://dx.doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.18.3.4
Archbold S, Lutman ME, Marshall DH. Categories of Auditory Perception. Annals of Otorhinolaryngology 1995; 104(Suppl 166): 312-314.
Elliot L, Katz D. Development of a new children’s test of speech discrimination. St. Louis, MO: Auditec 1980. Cited in Kirk KI, Diefendorf AO, Pisoni DB, Robbins AM. Assessing Speech Perception in Children. In Mendel L, Danhauer JL. Audiologic Evaluation and Management and Speech Perception Assessment. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group 1997; pp. 101-132.
Kirk KI, Pisoni DB, Osberger MJ. Lexical effects on spoken word recognition by pediatric cochlear implant users. Ear & Hearing 1995; 16: 470-481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199510000-00004
Silverman SR, Hirsh IJ. Problems related to the use of speech in clinical audiometry. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology 1955; 64(4): 1234-1244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000348945506400424
Waghmare P, Mohite J, Gore G. Development of Marathi Speech Recognition Test (Pediatric): A Preliminary Report. Journal of Indian Speech and Hearing Association 2011; 25(1): 59-64.
Kacker SK, Basavaraj V, Eds. Indian Speech, Language and Hearing Tests – the ISHA Battery -1990. Mysore: ISHA 1990.
Nillson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. Journal of Acoustical Society of America 1994; 95(2): 1085-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.408469
Kalikow DN, Stevens KN, Elliott LL. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Journal of Acoustical Society of America 1977; 61(5): 1337-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.381436
Boothroyd A, Hanin L, Hnath T. (1985). A sentence test of speech perception: Reliability, set equivalence, and short term learning (Report RC110). City University of New York (New York, NY). Cited in Tyler RS, et. al. Soundfield hearing for patients with cochlear implants and hearing aids. In Cooper HR, Craddock LC (Eds). Cochlear Implants. A Practical Guide (2nd ed). West Sussex: Whurr Publishers. 2006; 338-366.
Musiek FE. Assessment of Central Auditory Dysfunction: The dichotic digit test revisited. Ear and Hearing 1983; 4: 79-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198303000-00002
Govaerts PJ, Daemers K, Yperman M, De Beukelaer C, De Saegher G, De Ceulaer G. Auditory speech sounds evaluation (A§E®): a new test to assess detection, discrimination and identification in hearing impairment. Cochlear Implants International 2006; 7(2): 92-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/146701006807508106
World Health Organization 2007. Situation Review and Update on Deafness, Hearing Loss and Intervention Programs. Proposed Plans of Action for Prevention and Alleviation of Hearing Impairment in Countries of the South-East Asia Region. http://apps.searo.who.int/pds_docs/B3177. pdf (accessed on February 15, 2015).
Census of India 2001. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/ 2011common/CensusDataSummary.html. (accessed on January 12, 2015).
Boothroyd A. Developments in Speech Audiometry. British Journal of Audiology 1968; 2: 3-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/00381796809075436
Edgerton BJ, Danhauer JL. Clinical Implications of Speech Discrimination Testing Using Nonsense Stimuli. Baltimore: University Park Press 1979. Cited In: Mendel L, Danhauer JL. Characteristics of Sensitive Speech Perception Tests. In Mendel L, Danhauer JL. Audiologic Evaluation and Management and Speech Perception Assessment. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group 1997; pp. 59-99.
Hall JW, Mueller HG. Audiologists’ Desk Reference. Volume 1. Diagnostic Audiology Principles, Procedures, and Protocols. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group, Inc. 1997.
Penrod JP. Speech Discrimination Testing. In Katz J, Ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins 1985; pp. 235-255.
