Relação entre habilidades de processamento auditivo e funções neuropsicológicas em adolescentes
Relation between auditory processing abilities and neuropsychological process in teenagers
Mirella Liberatore Prando; Josiane Pawlowski; Jandyra Maria Guimarães Fachel; Mari Ivone Lanfredi Miserelli; Rochele Paz Fonseca
Resumo
Objetivo: averiguar a existência de relações entre o desempenho em testes de processamento auditivo e em tarefas cognitivas.
Métodos: participaram 12 adolescentes com desenvolvimento típico, estudantes de terceiro ano do Ensino Médio de escolas privadas do estado do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil, examinados com uma bateria de testes de PA(C) e com o Instrumento de Avaliação Neuropsicológica Breve Neupsilin. Foram realizadas análises de correlação de Pearson e análises qualitativas intertestes para comparação do desempenho na avaliação do PA(C) e na avaliação neuropsicológica.
Resultados: da bateria de testes PA(C), os Testes SSI – MCI – Teste de Sentenças Sintéticas com mensagem competitiva ipsilateral, SSW - Teste de Dissílabos Alternados e o teste Dicóticos de Dígitos apresentaram correlação forte significativa positiva (coeficiente de correlação de Pearson) com os subtestes do Neupsilin: atenção – contagem inversa, percepção de faces, linguagem oral automática e repetição, memória verbal episódica e memória de trabalho – span auditivo de palavras em sentenças. Alguns testes do PA(C) apresentaram maior frequência de dissociações com subtestes neuropsicológicos. As correlações encontradas indicam que os testes de PA(C) e as tarefas neuropsicológicas parecem examinar algumas habilidades cognitivas subjacentes em comum. As dissociações observadas sugerem que os processamentos auditivo e neuropsicológico são relativamente independentes e a análise intertestes do desempenho dos participantes na avaliação do PA(C), comparada ao desempenho na avaliação neuropsicológica, confirma os resultados encontrados para as questões anteriores.
Conclusão: ressalta-se a necessidade de se pensar o contexto da administração dos testes de PA(C), considerando-se a relação de complementaridade da avaliação neuropsicológica e do exame de processamento auditivo.
Palavras-chave
Abstract
Purpose: to check if there is a relation between the performance in auditory processing tests and in cognitive tasks.
Methods: the sample was made up by 12 teenagers in typical development, all of them high-school students (third year) in private schools from Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. They were evaluated through an auditory processing battery as well as with the Brazilian Brief Neuropsychological Assessment Battery NEUPSILIN. Data analyses included Person's correlation and qualitative interests interpretation towards a comparison of the performance in (C)AP's battery and in the neuropsychological assessment.
Results: regarding (C)AP's battery, SSI – MCI – Synthetic Sentence Test with ipsilateral competitive message, SSW - Test of Alternated Disyllables and Digit Dicotics tests showed a significant strong positive correlation with NEUPSILIN's subtests that follows: attention – reverse counting, face perception, oral language – automated language and repetition, episodic verbal memory and working memory – auditory word span in sentences. Some (C)AP's tests presented a greater frequency of dissociation when compared to neuropsychological tasks. Correlation index suggest that (C)AP's tests and neuropsychological tasks seem to evaluate some common basic cognitive abilities. The observed dissociation suggest that auditory and neuropsychological processing are partially independent on each other. The interests analysis confirms these results.
Conclusion: there is a need to rethink about the administration of (C)AP's tests, when it comes to the addition relation between neuropsychological assessment and auditory processing examination.
Keywords
Referencias
1. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association – ASHA. (Central) Auditory processing disorders: technical report. 2005. [acesso em: agosto 2005]. Disponível em: URL: http://www.asha.org/members/deskref-journals/deskref/default.
2. Bellis TJ. Assessment and management of central auditory processing disorders in the educational setting: from science to practice. San Diego, USA: Singular Publishing Group; 2003.
3. Musiek FE, Chermak DD. Handbook of (central) auditory processing disorders: auditory neuroscience and clinical diagnosis. Vol. 1. San Diego, USA: Plural Publishing; 2007.
4. Moore DR. Auditory processing disorder (APD): definition, diagnosis, neural basis, and intervention. Audiol Med. 2006; 4(1):4-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16513860600568573
5. Musiek FE, Bellis TJ, Chermak GD. Nonmodularity of the central auditory nervous system: implications for (central) auditory processing disorder. Am J Audiol. 2005; 14(2):128-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1059-0889(2005/014)
6. Cacace AT, McFarland DJ. Central auditory processing disorder in school-aged children: a critical review. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998; 41(2):355-73.
7. Cacace AT, McFarland DJ. The importance of modality specificity in diagnosing central auditory processing disorder. Am J Audiol. 2005; 14(2):112-23.
8. Rosen S. "A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma". Defining central auditory processing disorder. Am J Audiol. 2005; 14(2):139-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1059-0889(2005/015)
9. Jerger J, Musiek F. Report of the consensus conference on the diagnosis of auditory processing disorders in school-age children. J Am Acad Audiol. 2000; 11(9):467-74.
10. Bellis TJ, Billiet C, Ross J. Hemispheric lateralization of bilaterally presented homologous visual and auditory stimuli in normal adults, normal children, and children with central auditory dysfunction. Brain Cognition. 2008; 66(3):280-9.
11. Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW. Neuropsychological assessment. 4. ed. New York, USA: Oxford; 2004. p. 375-413.
12. Willmes K. Methodological and statistical considerations in cognitive neurolinguistics. In: Stemmer B, Whitaker HA, organizadores. Handbook of neurolinguistics. San Diego, USA: Academic Press; 1998. p. 57-70.
13. Critério de Classificação Econômica Brasil – CCEB. [homepage na internet] [acesso em maio 2007]. Disponível em: URL: http://www.abep.org/codigosguias/ABEP_CCEB_2003.pdf.
14. Auditec. Inc. St. Louis: MO USA. Disponível em: URL: http://www.auditec.com
15. Pereira LD, Schochat E. Processamento auditivo central: manual de avaliação. São Paulo: Lovise; 1997.
16. Pawlowski J. Evidências de validade e fidedignidade do instrumento de avaliação neuropsicológica breve Neupsilin. [dissertação]. Porto Alegre (RS): Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; 2007.
17. Amaral RA, Malbergier A. Avaliação de instrumento de detecção de problemas relacionados ao uso do álcool (CAGE) entre trabalhadores da Prefeitura do Campus da Universidade de São Paulo (USP) – Campus Capital. Rev Bras Psiquiatr. 2004; 26(3):156-63.
18. Fonseca RP, Salles JF, Parente MAMP. Development and content validity of the Brazilian brief neuropsychological assessment battery Neupsilin. Psychol Neurosci. 2008; 1(1):55-62.
19. Fonseca RP, Salles JF, Parente MAMP. Instrumento de avaliação neuropsicológica breve: Neupsilin. São Paulo: Vetor; 2009.
20. Nijland L. Speech perception in children with speech output disorders. Clin Linguist Phonet. Mar 2009; 23(3):222-39.
21. Bamiou DE, Sisodiya S, Musiek FE, Luxon LM. The role of the interhemispheric pathway in hearing. Brain Res Rev. 2007; 56(1):170-82.
22. Baddeley A. Working memory and language: an overview. J Commun Disord. 2003; 36(3):189-208.
23. Strauss E, Sherman EMS, Spreen O. A compendium of neuropsychological tests. 3. ed. New York, USA: Oxford; 2006.
24. McCarthy RA, Warrington EK. Cognitive neuropsychology: a clinical introduction. London, UK: Academic Press Ltd; 1990.
25. Shinn JB, Baran JA, Moncrieff DW, Musiek FE. Differential attention effects on dichotic listening. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005; 16(4):205-18.
26. Katz J, Tillery KL. Can central auditory processing tests resist supramodal influences? Am J Audiol. 2005; 14(2):124-7.
27. Riccio CA, Cohen MJ, Garrison T, Smith B. Auditory processing measures: correlation with neuropsychological measures of attention, memory and behavior. Child Neuropsychol. 2005; 11(4):363-72.
28. Chermak GD, Hall JW III, Musiek FE. Differential diagnosis and management of central auditory processing disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. J Am Acad Audiol. 1999; 10(6):289-303.
29. Chermak GD. It takes a team to differentially diagnose APD. Hear J. 2003; 56(4):71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.HJ.0000293914.81047.29
30. Dawes P, Bishop D. Auditory processing disorder in relation to developmental disorders of language, communication and attention: a review and critique. Int J Lang Commun Disord. jul-aug 2009; 44(4):440-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13682820902929073
31. Bamiou DE, Campbell N, Sirimanna T. Management of auditory processing disorders. Audiol Med. 2006; 4(1):46-56.
32. Kim MJ, Jeon HA, Lee KM, Son YD, Kim YB, Cho ZH. Neuroimaging features in a case of developmental central auditory processing disorder. J Neurol Sci. 2009; 277(1-2):176-80.
33. White RF, Campbell R, Echeverria D, Knox SS, Janulewicz P. Assessment of neuropsychological trajectories in longitudinal population-based studies of children. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 2009; 63(Suppl1):i15-26.
Submitted date:
29/05/2009
Accepted date:
06/12/2009
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email