|تعداد مشاهده مقاله||10,702,979|
|تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله||5,167,920|
Review on Spatial Hearing Processing Disorder and Its’ Rehabilitation Methods among Elderly in Iran
|Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences & Research|
|مقاله 3، دوره 8، شماره 4، اسفند 2021، صفحه 164-168 اصل مقاله (576.39 K)|
|نوع مقاله: Literature Reviews|
|شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jrsr.2021.91576.1177|
|Maryam Delphi 1؛ Afsaneh Doosti 2|
|1Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Center, Department of Audiology, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran|
|2Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran and Rehabilitation Sciences Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran|
|Background: The hearing system can detect the location of the sound source and help us pay attention to it. In the presence of the background noise, it helps detecting the desired signal (especially speech) and comprehend it. This ability is called spatial hearing processing. Spatial hearing processing disorder can adversely affect signal detection in noise, which is very important in the elderly. The aim of the present paper was reviewing the spatial hearing processing disorder and its ‘rehabilitation methods in Iran for the elderly.|
Method: In this narrative paper, theoretically, all papers on spatial hearing processing disorder and its’ rehabilitation methods among the elderly in Iran from 2000 to February 2021 were collected. The papers with the following keywords in Medline, Google scholar, Proquest, science direct, Scopus, and Magiran were studied after discarding duplicated papers: spatial stream, binaural advantage, spatial release of masking, spatial hearing segregation, rehabilitation, aging, elderly, speech in noise, localization, training, and Iran .
Results: Aging adversely affects the spatial hearing processing and especially in complex environments, so rehabilitation of spatial hearing disorders can potentially improve comprehending speech in noise for the elderly.
Conclusion: The results of this study showed that there is absolutely necessary to develop different rehabilitation programs for different elderly groups base on their needs.
|spatial processing؛ hearing؛ auditory processing disorder؛ elderly؛ rehabilitation|
1. Scott SK. Auditory processing—speech, space and auditory objects. Current opinion in neurobiology. 2005;15(2):197-201.
2. Gilkey R, Anderson TR. Binaural and spatial hearing in real and virtual environments: Psychology Press; 2014.
3. Kumpik DP, King AJ. A review of the effects of unilateral hearing loss on spatial hearing. Hearing research. 2019;372:17-28.
4. Moossavi A, Delphi M. Spatial hearing: models, and functions. Journal of Research in rehabilitation Science. 2014; 10 (2): 346-357.
5. Zamiri Abdollahi F, Delphi M, Delphi V. Spatial hearing and speech understanding in noise in elderly. Hearing, Balance and Communication. 2021;19(1):21-5.
6. Delphi M, Zamiri Abdollahi F, Tyler R, Bakhit M, Saki N, Nazeri AR. Validity and reliability of the Persian version of spatial hearing questionnaire. Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 2015;29:231.
7. Culling JF, Akeroyd MA. Spatial hearing. Oxford handbook of auditory science: Hearing. 2010:123-44.
8. Joris PX, Smith PH, Yin TC. Coincidence detection in the auditory system: 50 years after Jeffress. Neuron. 1998;21(6):1235-8.
9. Fitzpatrick DC, Kuwada S, Batra R. Transformations in processing interaural time differences between the superior olivary complex and inferior colliculus: beyond the Jeffress model. Hearing research. 2002;168(1-2):79-89.
10. Ashida G, Carr CE. Sound localization: Jeffress and beyond. Current opinion in neurobiology. 2011;21(5):745-51.
11. Brand A, Behrend O, Marquardt T, McAlpine D, Grothe B. Precise inhibition is essential for microsecond interaural time difference coding. Nature. 2002;417(6888):543-7.
12. Slee SJ, Young ED. Linear processing of interaural level difference underlies spatial tuning in the nucleus of the brachium of the inferior colliculus. Journal of Neuroscience. 2013;33(9):3891-904.
13. Bures Z, Marsalek P. On the precision of neural computation with interaural level differences in the lateral superior olive. Brain research. 2013;1536:16-26.
14. Tsai JJ, Koka K, Tollin DJ. Varying overall sound intensity to the two ears impacts interaural level difference discrimination thresholds by single neurons in the lateral superior olive. Journal of neurophysiology. 2010;103(2):875-86.
15. Humes LE, Dubno JR, Gordon-Salant S, Lister JJ, Cacace AT, Cruickshanks KJ, et al. Central presbycusis: a review and evaluation of the evidence. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2012;23(8):635-66.
16. Kalluri S, Humes LE. Hearing technology and cognition. American journal of audiology. 2012. 21(2):338-43.
17. Pichora-Fuller MK, Levitt H. Speech comprehension training and auditory and cognitive processing in older adults. American journal of audiology. 2012;21(2):351-7.
18. Anderson S, Parbery-Clarck A, White-Schwoch T, Kraus N. Aging affects neural precision of speech encoding. J Neurosci 2012;32(41):14156–64.
19. Martin JS JJ. Some efects of aging on central auditory processing. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005;42:25–44.
20. Atcherson SR, Nagaraj NK, Kennett SEW, Levisee M. Overview of central auditory processing defcits in older adults. . Semin Hear 2015;36 (3):150–61.
21. Gallun FJ, Diedesch AC, Kampel SD, Kakien KM. Independent impacts of age and hearing loss on spatial release in a complex auditory environment. Frontiers in Neurosci 2013;7:25–9.
22. Adel Ghahraman M, Ashrafi M, Mohammadkhani Gh, Jalaie Sh. Efects of aging on spatial hearing. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2020;32:733–9.
23. Koehnke J, Besing J M. The effects of aging on binaural and spatial hearing. Seminars in hearing; 22 (3), 241-253.
24. Gonçales AS, Cury MCL. Assessment of two central auditory tests in elderly patients without hearing complaints. Brazilian Journal of otorhinolaryngology. 2011;77(1):24-32.
25. Nazeri AR, Lotfi Y, Moossavi A, Zamiri F, Delphi M.Auditory processing disorders in elderly people. Scientific Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine [in Persian].2014; 3 (1): 58-66.
26. Kirk EC, Smith D W. Protection from acoustic trauma is not a primary function of the medial olivocochlear efferent system. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2003(4):445-65.
27. Maison SF, Vetter DE, Liberman MC. A novel effect of cochlear efferents: in vivo response enhancement does not require α9 cholinergic receptors. J Neurophysiol. 2007;97:3269-78.
receptors. J Neurophysiol. 2007;97:3269-78.
28. Elgoyhen AB, Katz E, Fuchs PA. The nicotinic receptor of cochlear hair cells: a possible pharmacotherapeutic target? . Biochem Pharmacol 2009;78:712-9.
29. etter DE, Liberman MC, Mann J, Barhanin J, Boulter J, Brown MC, et al. Role of α9 nicotinic Ach receptor subunits in the development and function of cochlear efferent innervation. Neuron 1999;23:93-103.
30. Guinan JR JJ. Olivocochlear efferents: anatomy, physiology, function, and the measurement of efferent effects in humans.2006;Ear Hear. 27(6):589–607.
31. Guinan JR JJ. Cochlear efferent innervation and function. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;18(5):447–53.
32. Mishra SK, Lutman ME. Top-down influences of the medial olivoco chlear efferent system in speech perception in noise. PLoS One. 2014;9:e85756.
33. Benjamin FU, Le Prell C, Simmons D, Lei D, Schrader A, Chen A B, Bao J. Age-related synaptic loss of the medial olivocochlear efferent innervation. Molecular Neurodegeneration 2010;5:53-61.
34. Lisowska G, Namyslowski G, Orecka B, Misiolek M. Influence of aging on medial olivocochlear system function. Clinical Interventions in Aging. 2014;9:901–14.
35. Jacobson M, Kim S, Romney J, Zhu X, Frisina RD. Contralateral suppression of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions declines with age: a comparison of findings in CBA mice with human listeners. Laryngoscope. 2003;113(10):1707–13.
36. Glyde H, Cameron S, Dillon H, Hickson L. Remediation of spatial processing deficits in hearing-impaired children and adults. J Am Acad Audiol 2014;25(6):549-61.
37. Neher T, Behrens T, Carlile S, Jin C, Kragelund L, Peterson AS. Benefit from spatial separation of multiple talkers in bilateral hearing-aid users: effects of hearing loss, age, and cognition. Int J Audiol 2009;48(11):758-74.
38. Shinn-Cunningham B. Models of plasticity in spatial auditory processing. Audiol Neurootol 2001;6(4):187-91.
39. Sweetow RW, Henderson-sabes J. The case for LACE: listening and auditory communication enhancement training. The Hearing Journal.2004.57(3):32-5.
40. Weihing J, Chermak GD, Musiek FE. Auditory training for central auditory processing disorder. Seminars in hearing; 2015: 36(4): 199–215.
41. Katz J, Chertoff M, Sawusch JR. Dichotic training. Journal of Auditory Research. 1984.
42. Gil D, Iorio MC. Formal auditory training in adult hearing aid users. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2010 Feb;65(2):165-74.
43. Jarollahi F, Amiri M, Jalaie Sh , Sameni SJ. The effects of auditory spatial training on informational masking release in elderly listeners: a study protocol for a randomized clinical trial[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research. 2019;8(420).
44. Rajan R, Cainer KE. Ageing without hearing loss or cognitive impairment causes a decrease in speech intelligibility only in informational maskers. Neuroscience. 2008;154(2 ):784–95.
45. Lu Z, Daneman M, Schneider BA. Does increasing the intelligibility of a competing sound source interfere more with speech comprehension in older adults than it does in younger adults? . Atten Percept Psychophys. 2016;78(8):2655–77.
46. Lotfi Y, Samadi Qaleh Juqy Z , Moosavi A, Sadjedi H, Bakhshi E. The Effects of Spatial Auditory Training on Speech Perception in Noise in the Elderly. Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences. 2020;7(1):40–6.
47. Pichora-Fuller K, MacDonald E. Auditory temporal processing deficits in older listeners: From a review to a future view of Presbycusis. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research. 2007.1: 291-300.
48. Anderson S, Parbery- Clark A, Yi H-G, Kraus N. A neural basis of speech-in-noise perception in older adults. Ear and hearing. 2011;32(6):750-757.
49. Anderson S, Skoe E, Chandrasekaran B, Zecker S, Kraus N. Brainstem correlates of speech in-noise perception in children. Hearing research 2010;270(1):151-7.
50. Gaudrain E, Grimault N. Streaming of vowel sequences based on fundamental frequency in a cochlear-implant simulation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2008;124(5):3076-87.
51. AJ. O. Pitch perception and auditory stream segregation: implications for hearing loss and cochlear implants. Trends in amplification. 2008;12(4):316-31.
52. Vander Werff KR, Burns K S. Brain stem responses to speech in younger and older adults. Ear and hearing. 2011;32(2):168-80.
53. Heidari A, Moossavi A, Yadegari F, Bakhshi E, Ahadi M. Effect of Vowel Auditory Training on the Speech-In-Noise Perception among Older Adults with Normal Hearing. Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology. 2020;32(4):229-36.
54. Delphi M, Lotfi Y, Moossavi A, Bakhshi E, Banimostafa M. Reliability of interaural time difference-based localization training in elderly individuals with speech-in-noise perception disorder. Iranian journal of medical sciences. 2017;42(5):437.
55. Delphi M, Lotfi Y, Moossavi A, Bakhshi E, Banimostafa M. Envelope-based inter-aural time difference localization training to improve speech-in-noise perception in the elderly. Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 2017;31:36.
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 625
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 361