ABSTRACT
Abstract Introduction The importance of temporal ordering and sequencing in the auditory system is discussed because these are considered basic functions for language. Objective To verify the correlation between the practice of choir music and the temporal ordering in elderly with no prior formal musical experience. Method The study design is cross-sectional. The sample consisted of 85 elderly individuals of both genders, ≥ 60 years old, and it was composed of 43 elderly individuals with no prior formal musical experience but choir participation (research group) and 42 elderly individuals who never sang in a choir and had no music training during their life (control group). The research group was divided based on three categories of choir time. The performances of the research and control groups were compared with pitch pattern sequence (PPS), verbal condition (PPSverb), humming condition (PPShum), and duration pattern sequence (DPS) tests. Results The mean PPShum and PPSverb showed a statistically significant difference by choir time with a different mean of PPShum between the no singing experience group (59%) and the > 10 years of singing experience group (90%) (p= 0.02). Regarding the averages of PPSverb, there was a statistically significant difference between the no singing experience (23%) and > 10 years of choir time (54%) (p= 0.02) groups. Conclusion The findings indicate a better performance in the temporal ordering of the elderly who are not formal musicians but who have choir experience in the research group in relation to those with no choir experience in the control group.
ABSTRACT
Objetivo: analisar o desempenho de idosos com perda auditiva em comparação a idosos normo-ouvintes no teste de padrões de frequência (TPF) e duração (TPD). Estratégia de pesquisa: As estratégias de busca eletrônica foram desenvolvidas individualmente para os seguintes bancos de dados: LILACS, LIVIVO, Pubmed, Scopus, SpeechBITE e Web of Science. A literatura cinzenta foi pesquisada usando o Google Scholar, OpenGrey e Proquest Dissertações e Teses. Critérios de seleção: Foram incluídos estudos observacionais que avaliaram idosos (acima de 60 anos) com perda auditiva relacionada à idade ou presbiacusia, variando de leve a moderadamente grave, com diferentes escores em comparação a idosos com audição normal no TPF e TPD. A metodologia dos estudos selecionados foi avaliada por meio de ferramentas de avaliação crítica Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (MAStARI) para estudos transversais. Não foram aplicadas restrições quanto ao idioma, período de publicação ou sexo. Resultados: O título e o resumo de 1042 artigos foram analisados ââapós a remoção das duplicatas. A partir desta análise, foram analisados ââos textos completos de 15 artigos. Cinco estudos foram incluídos nesta revisão sistemática, três utilizaram o TPD na versão de Musiek e dois a da Auditec do TPF e TPD. O risco de viés foi baixo (três estudos) e moderado (dois estudos), de acordo com este protocolo. Conclusão: Esta revisão sistemática não mostrou diferenças de escores entre os grupos com presbiacusia em comparação com a audição normal no TPF e TPD. São necessários mais estudos primários utilizando o mesmo protocolo para TPF e TPD.
Purpose: to analyze the performance of elderly people with hearing loss compared to normal-hearing elderly people in the Pitch Pattern Sequence Test (PPS) and Duration Pattern Sequence Test (DPS). Research strategy: Electronic search strategies were individually developed for each of the following databases: LILACS, LIVIVO, Pubmed, Scopus, SpeechBITE and Web of Science. Grey literature was searched by using Google Scholar, OpenGrey and Proquest Dissertations and Theses. Selection criteria: Observational studies that evaluated elderly (over 60 years old) with age related hearing loss or presbycusis, ranging from mild to moderately severe, with different scores, compared to normal hearing for pitch (PPS) or duration pattern sequence (DPS) tests were included. The methodology of selected studies was evaluated using Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (MAStARI) critical appraisal tools for cross sectional studies. No restrictions regarding language, period of publication or gender were applied. Results: Title and summary of 1042 articles were analyzed after duplicates were removed. From this analysis, the full texts of 15 articles were analyzed. Five studies were included in this systematic review, three studies used the Musiek DPS version, two used the Auditec DPS and PPS version. Risk of bias was low (three studies) and moderate (two studies), according to this protocol. Conclusion: This systematic review showed no score differences between groups with presbycusis compared with normal hearing for DPS and PPS test. More primary studies utilizing the same protocol for PPS and DPS are needed.
Objetivo: analizar el desempeño de ancianos con hipoacusia en comparación con ancianos con audición normal en la prueba de patrones de frecuencia (PPF) y duración (PPD). Estrategia de búsqueda: Se desarrollaron estrategias de búsqueda electrónica individualmente para las siguientes bases de datos: LILACS, LIVIVO, Pubmed, Scopus, SpeechBITE y Web of Science. Se realizaron búsquedas en literatura gris utilizando Google Scholar, OpenGrey y Proquest Dissertations and Theses. Criterios de selección: Se incluyeron estudios observacionales que evaluaron a ancianos (mayores de 60 años) con pérdida auditiva relacionada con la edad o presbiacusia, que van de leve a moderadamente severa, con puntajes diferentes en comparación con ancianos con audición normal en PPF y PPD. La metodología de los estudios seleccionados se evaluó utilizando herramientas de evaluación crítica Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (MAStARI) para estudios transversales. No se aplicaron restricciones en cuanto a idioma, período de publicación o género. Resultados: Se analizaron el título y resumen de 1042 artículos después de eliminar los duplicados. A partir de este análisis, se analizaron los textos completos de 15 artículos. Se incluyeron cinco estudios en esta revisión sistemática, tres utilizaron el PPD en la versión Musiek y dos en la versión Auditec del PPF y PPD. El riesgo de sesgo fue bajo (tres estudios) y moderado (dos estudios), según este protocolo. Conclusión: Esta revisión sistemática no mostró diferencias en las puntuaciones entre los grupos con presbiacusia en comparación con la audición normal en PPF y PPD. Se necesitan más estudios primarios que utilicen el mismo protocolo para PPF y PPD.