ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Historically, the Deaf community and audiologists have had differing views concerning hearing loss intervention. Even so, members of the Deaf community may see an audiologist for a variety of reasons and it is important that audiologists understand how to best work with these individuals. Professional audiological organizations encourage cultural competence when working with different cultures, including the Deaf community. PURPOSE: This study investigates audiologists' current cultural competency and exposure to, knowledge of, and attitudes towards Deaf individuals. RESEARCH DESIGN: A survey was sent out to 600 audiologists and descriptive analyses was completed. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study data were managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools and subsequently tabulated for each of the various survey questions. RESULTS: Findings indicate that audiologists have relatively limited exposure to this population in a clinical setting, most use interpreters, and most would like to take more ASL courses. Audiologists' attitudes were positive in serving members from the Deaf community. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that more education on the use of interpreters would be beneficial. Future research may include examining the Deaf community's experience with audiologists, and the impact of exposure and other variables on the knowledge of and interactions with this population.
Subject(s)
Audiologists , Audiology , Allied Health Personnel , Attitude , Humans , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This article outlines the author's conceptualization of the key mechanisms that are engaged in the processing of spoken language, referred to as the spoken language processing model. The act of processing what is heard is very complex and involves the successful intertwining of auditory, cognitive, and language mechanisms. Spoken language processing disorders occur when a breakdown in any of these mechanisms impacts an individual's ability to effectively process and use the information that is heard. The symptoms vary depending on the underlying deficit(s). The primary purpose of this article is to provide the reader with a basic understanding of these mechanisms, and, in turn, enable readers to (a) review the literature concerning processing disorders with discernment and (b) have a foundation for developing a test battery to derive composite profiles of individuals' processing abilities. METHOD: A review of the literature, overview of the spoken language processing model, and suggested approach to diagnostic assessment are presented. CONCLUSION: Spoken language processing can break down due to a myriad of underlying causes. Central auditory nervous system deficits can impact not only the initial processing of stimuli but possibly the development of effective language skills. On the other hand, deficits in various cognitive and language mechanisms can similarly impact the auditory processing of speech stimuli. Therefore, it is critical to understand how these mechanisms interact and contribute to the processing of speech stimuli.
Subject(s)
Auditory Perceptual Disorders/diagnosis , Language Development Disorders/diagnosis , School Health Services , Speech-Language Pathology , Attention , Auditory Perceptual Disorders/therapy , Child , Cooperative Behavior , Diagnosis, Differential , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , Language Development Disorders/therapy , Learning Disabilities/diagnosis , Learning Disabilities/therapy , Memory, Short-Term , Phonetics , Retention, Psychology , Sound SpectrographyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: In this systematic review, the peer-reviewed literature on the efficacy of interventions for school-age children with auditory processing disorder (APD) is critically evaluated. METHOD: Searches of 28 electronic databases yielded 25 studies for analysis. These studies were categorized by research phase (e.g., exploratory, efficacy) and ranked on a standard set of quality features related to methodology and reporting. RESULTS: Some support exists for the claim that auditory and language interventions can improve auditory functioning in children with APD and those with primary spoken language disorder. There is little indication, however, that observed improvements are due to the auditory features of these programs. Similarly, evidence supporting the effects of these programs on spoken and written language functioning is limited. CONCLUSION: The evidence base is too small and weak to provide clear guidance to speech-language pathologists faced with treating children with diagnosed APD, but some cautious skepticism is warranted until the record of evidence is more complete. Clinicians who decide to use auditory interventions should be aware of the limitations in the evidence and take special care to monitor the spoken and written language status of their young clients.
