test protocol

15
Test results and remediation outcomes for children seen through Australian Hearing’s national CAPD service. Alison King 1 , Helen Glyde 2 , Sharon Cameron 2 , Karin Gillies 1 , Harvey Dillon 2 , Simone Punch 3 , Meagan Ward 3 1 Australian Hearing, Box Hill, Victoria, Australia. 2 National Acoustic Laboratories, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia 3 Australian Hearing, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia World Congress of Audiology, Brisbane, Australia - May 2014

Upload: waldo

Post on 16-Feb-2016

27 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Test results and remediation outcomes for children seen through Australian Hearing’s national CAPD service. Alison King 1 , Helen Glyde 2 , Sharon Cameron 2 , Karin Gillies 1 , Harvey Dillon 2 , Simone Punch 3 , Meagan Ward 3 1 Australian Hearing, Box Hill, Victoria , Australia. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Test  Protocol

Test results and remediation outcomes for children seen through Australian Hearing’s national CAPD service.Alison King1, Helen Glyde2, Sharon Cameron2, Karin Gillies1, Harvey Dillon2, Simone Punch3, Meagan Ward3

1Australian Hearing, Box Hill, Victoria, Australia.2 National Acoustic Laboratories, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia3Australian Hearing, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia

World Congress of Audiology, Brisbane, Australia - May 2014

Page 2: Test  Protocol

Test Protocol Hearing

screening

LiSN - HC

Paed. HA Program

LiSN

Memory

Age

DDT

Fail

Pass

Z < -1

Z ≥ -1

SPDFail

Pass (not SPD)

Pass

Auditory

memory

Fail

> 7 years

Pass

Dichotic

deficitFail

Testing discontinued

Pre-App Q’nnaire, COSI-C

< 7 yrs

Page 3: Test  Protocol

Results

3 636

Unknown

23

666

Hearing screeni

ngMinimal

SensorineuralMild

Conductive4

Pass

Memory

Z ≥ -1 317

Pass (not SPD) 219

Auditory memory

Fail174

Age

DDT

Pass 362

> 7 yrs 285

Pass 181

Dichotic deficit

Fail104

Testing discontinued

< 7 yrs77

LiSN - HC LiSN Z < -1 349 SPD

Fail130

Page 4: Test  Protocol

Results - NH666

Hearing screeni

ngMinimal

SensorineuralMild

Conductive

Unknown

23 4

3 636Pass

LiSN - HC LiSN Z < -1 329 SPD

Fail120

Memory

Z ≥ -1 307

Pass (not SPD) 209

Auditory memory

Fail167

Age

DDT

Pass 349

> 7 yrs 273

Pass 173

Dichotic deficit

Fail100

Testing discontinued

< 7 yrs76

Page 5: Test  Protocol

Remediation Program• Home-based auditory training packages with

audiologist support during program – SPD - LiSN & Learn, – Memory Deficit - Memory Booster

• FM system for DDT fail or difficulties in noise• StrategiesFollow-Up• Review COSI-C• Teacher version of Listening Inventory For Education

(LIFE - Anderson and Smaldino.)• Repeat relevant test from battery.

Page 6: Test  Protocol

Remediation Outcomes – LiSN & Learn

Test result No. Children (% initial ref)

Remediation Commenced

Remediation complete at time of analysis

Spatial Processing Disorder

130 (19.5%) LiSN & Learn = 57 33 (58%)

L&L + FM = 12 8 (66%)

Page 7: Test  Protocol

LiSN-S results: Pre- vs. Post-training (N=40)

Page 8: Test  Protocol

Performance in real life, post L&L (n=34)

No change Small Change Significant Change/Goal Achieved

0

5

10

15

20

25

COSI-C final score

No.

Obs

erva

tions

Page 9: Test  Protocol

Remediation Outcomes – Memory BoosterTest result No. Children

(% initial ref)Remediation Commenced

Remediation complete at time of analysis

Memory Deficit 174 (26.1%) Memory Booster = 47 28 (60%)

MB + FM = 5 4 (80%)

Auditory Memory Results

NMF

Pass Fail

NMR Pass 362 67

Fail 58 49

Page 10: Test  Protocol

Memory tests - post-training

NMF (n=18) NMR (n=18)NB: Excluded scores of children who were WNL at original test.

Page 11: Test  Protocol

Performance in real life (n=26)

No change Small Change Significant Change/Goal Achieved

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

COSI-C final score

No.

Obs

erva

tions

Page 12: Test  Protocol

Remediation Outcomes – FM fittingReasons for FM fitting (n=29) COSI – C final scores (n=16)

No change Small Change Significant Change/Goal

Achieved

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

No.

Obs

erva

tions

Binaural In-tegration

Other diagnosis category

Pass0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

No.

Obs

erva

tions

Page 13: Test  Protocol

Other considerations• Main reasons for incomplete auditory

training– Ongoing at time of data collection

• L&L = 11%; MB = 10%– Lost contact with families despite numerous attempts

• L&L = 25%; MB = 52%– Unknown/data unavailable

• L&L = 43%; MB = 24%• Difficulties getting LIFE returned from

teachers• Setting & evaluating S.M.A.R.T. goals

Page 14: Test  Protocol

Conclusions• 61.3 % of children referred were diagnosed with one of

the target auditory processing disorders.• Both auditory training programs led to significantly

improved test scores (LiSN-S and NMR both WNL)– The majority of children showed significant

improvements in real life settings• FM fittings yielded improvements in real-life

performance.• Goal setting, evaluation and teacher

questionnaires are vital for evaluating success– Family support essential throughout program– Additional strategies needed to engage teachers in

evaluation

Page 15: Test  Protocol

ContactAustralian Hearingwww.hearing.com.auwww.nal.gov.au

Thanks to all the Australian Hearing audiologists who provided the CAPD services and the data that were used in this presentation.