ABSTRACT
OBJETIVO: Analizar la asociación de competencias cognitivas en sujetos con hipoacusia unilateral severa versus sujetos con audición normal. MÉTODOS: Participaron 40 adultos; 20 pacientes, 10 de cada género, con hipoacusia unilateral sensorial severa y 20 sujetos sanos pareados al grupo de estudio. Las habilidades cognitivas se midieron con la batería Woodcock Muñoz-revisada y los procesos centrales auditivos con pruebas psicoacústicas monoaurales. Se realizaron gráficas de caja y prueba t de Student para muestras relacionadas con significación p ≤ 0,05. RESULTADOS: Al comparar el desempeño en las pruebas palabra filtrada y bisílabos comprimidos, se encontró diferencia estadísticamente significativa p ≤ 0,05, con mayor variabilidad de respuesta en los hipoacúsicos, los cuales también tuvieron mejor desempeño cognitivo en las subpruebas inversión de números, aprendizaje visual auditivo, análisis y síntesis, formación de conceptos y palabras incompletas. CONCLUSIONES: Los hipoacúsicos presentaron bajo desempeño en palabra filtrada y bisílabos comprimidos, y mayor habilidad para memoria, razonamiento y procesamiento auditivo. Es importante realizar pruebas complementarias, tales como procesos centrales auditivos y habilidades cognitivas que permitan establecer estrategias de habilitación, rehabilitación y terapéuticas con la finalidad de optimizar y estimular las habilidades de los sujetos con hipoacusia unilateral
OBJECTIVE: To analyse cognitive skills in patients with severe unilateral hearing loss versus those in subjects with normal hearing. METHODS: 40 adults participated: 20 patients (10 women and 10 men) with severe unilateral hearing loss and 20 healthy subjects matched to the study group. Cognitive abilities were measured with the Spanish version of the Woodcock Johnson Battery-Revised; central auditory processing was assessed with monaural psychoacoustic tests. Box plots were drawn and t tests were performed for samples with a significance of P≤.05. RESULTS: A comparison of performances on the filtered word testing and time-compressed disyllabic word tests between patients and controls revealed a statistically significant difference (P≤.05) with greater variability among responses by hearing impaired subjects. This same group also showed a better cognitive performance on the numbers reversed, visual auditory learning, analysis synthesis, concept formation, and incomplete words tests. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with hearing loss performed more poorly than controls on the filtered word and time-compressed disyllabic word tests, but more competently on memory, reasoning, and auditory processing tasks. Complementary tests, such as those assessing central auditory processes and cognitive ability tests, are important and helpful for designing habilitation/rehabilitation and therapeutic strategies intended to optimise and stimulate cognitive skills in subjects with unilateral hearing impairment
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Young Adult , Adult , Cognition/physiology , Hearing Loss/therapy , Neuropsychological Tests/statistics & numerical data , Auditory Perception , Hearing Loss, SensorineuralABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyse cognitive skills in patients with severe unilateral hearing loss versus those in subjects with normal hearing. METHODS: 40 adults participated: 20 patients (10 women and 10 men) with severe unilateral hearing loss and 20 healthy subjects matched to the study group. Cognitive abilities were measured with the Spanish version of the Woodcock Johnson Battery-Revised; central auditory processing was assessed with monaural psychoacoustic tests. Box plots were drawn and t tests were performed for samples with a significance of P≤.05. RESULTS: A comparison of performances on the filtered word testing and time-compressed disyllabic word tests between patients and controls revealed a statistically significant difference (P≤.05) with greater variability among responses by hearing impaired subjects. This same group also showed a better cognitive performance on the numbers reversed, visual auditory learning, analysis synthesis, concept formation, and incomplete words tests. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with hearing loss performed more poorly than controls on the filtered word and time-compressed disyllabic word tests, but more competently on memory, reasoning, and auditory processing tasks. Complementary tests, such as those assessing central auditory processes and cognitive ability tests, are important and helpful for designing habilitation/rehabilitation and therapeutic strategies intended to optimise and stimulate cognitive skills in subjects with unilateral hearing impairment.
