Long-term use benefits of personal frequency-modulated systems for speech in noise perception in patients with stroke with auditory processing deficits: a non-randomised controlled trial study

Nehzat Koohi, Deborah Vickers, Jason Warren, David Werring, Doris-Eva Bamiou, Nehzat Koohi, Deborah Vickers, Jason Warren, David Werring, Doris-Eva Bamiou

Abstract

Objectives: Approximately one in five stroke survivors suffer from difficulties with speech reception in noise, despite normal audiometry. These deficits are treatable with personal frequency-modulated systems (FMs). This study aimed to evaluate long-term benefits in speech reception in noise, after daily 10-week use of personal FMs, in non-aphasic patients with stroke with auditory processing deficits.

Design: This was a prospective non-randomised controlled trial study. Patients were allocated to an intervention care group or standard care subjects group according to their willingness to use the intervention or not.

Setting: Tertiary care setting.

Participants: Nine non-aphasic subjects with ischaemic stroke, normal/near-normal audiometry and auditory processing deficits and with reported difficulties understanding speech in background noise were recruited in the subacute stroke stage (3-12 months after stroke).

Interventions: Four patients (intervention care subjects) used the FMs in their daily life over 10 weeks. Five patients (standard care subjects) received standard care.

Primary outcome measures: All subjects were tested at baseline (visit 1) and 10 weeks later (visit 2) on a sentences in noise test with the FMs (aided) and without the FMs (unaided).

Results: Speech reception thresholds showed clinically and statistically significant improvements in intervention but not in standard care subjects at 10 weeks in aided and unaided conditions.

Conclusions: 10-week use of FMs by adult patients with stroke may lead to benefits in unaided speech in noise perception. Our findings may indicate auditory plasticity type changes and require further investigation.

Trial registration number: Pre-results; NCT02889107.

Keywords: auditory plasticity; auditory processing; frequency modulated systems; speech in noise.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A and B) Speech reception threshold (SRT) at visit 1 and visit 2 in aided (A) and unaided conditions (B) for noise coming 90° to the left and for noise coming 90° to the right. SRT, speech reception threshold; S, subject.

References

    1. Häusler R, Levine R. Auditory dysfunction in stroke. Acta Otolaryngol 2000;120:689–703. 10.1080/000164800750000207
    1. Formby C, Phillips DE, Thomas RG. Hearing loss among stroke patients. Ear Hear 1987;8:326–32. 10.1097/00003446-198712000-00007
    1. O'Halloran R, Worrall LE, Hickson L. The number of patients with communication related impairments in acute hospital stroke units. Int J Speech Langu Pathol 2009;11:438–49. 10.3109/17549500902741363
    1. Rey B, Frischknecht R, Maeder P, et al. . Patterns of recovery following focal hemispheric lesions: relationship between lasting deficit and damage to specialized networks. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2007;25:285–94.
    1. Bamiou DE, Musiek FE, Stow I, et al. . Auditory temporal processing deficits in patients with insular stroke. Neurology 2006;67:614–19. 10.1212/01.wnl.0000230197.40410.db
    1. Bamiou DE, Werring D, Cox K, et al. . Patient-reported auditory functions after stroke of the central auditory pathway. Stroke 2012;43:1285–9. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.644039
    1. Koohi N, Vickers D, Chandrashekar H, et al. . Auditory rehabilitation after stroke: treatment of auditory processing disorders in stroke patients with personal frequency-modulated (FM) systems. Disabil Rehabil 2016;39:586–93..
    1. McShefferty D, Whitmer WM, Akeroyd MA. The just-meaningful difference in speech-to-noise ratio. Trends Hear 2016;20:2331216515626570 10.1177/2331216515626570
    1. Johnston KN, John AB, Kreisman NV, et al. . Multiple benefits of personal FM system use by children with auditory processing disorder (APD). Int J Audiol 2009;48:371–83. 10.1080/14992020802687516
    1. Hornickel J, Zecker SG, Bradlow AR, et al. . Assistive listening devices drive neuroplasticity in children with dyslexia. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2012;109:16731–6. 10.1073/pnas.1206628109
    1. Lewis MS, Hutter M, Lilly DJ, et al. . Frequency-modulation technology as a method for improving speech perception in noise for individuals with multiple sclerosis. J Am Acad Audiol 2006;17:605–16. 10.3766/jaaa.17.8.7
    1. Rance G, Corben LA, Du Bourg E, et al. . Successful treatment of auditory perceptual disorder in individuals with Friedreich ataxia. Neuroscience 2010;171:552–5. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.09.013
    1. Musiek FE, Shinn J, Hare C. Plasticity, auditory training, and auditory processing disorders. Semin Hear 2002;23:263–76. 10.1055/s-2002-35862
    1. Mattioli F, Ambrosi C, Mascaro L, et al. . Early aphasia rehabilitation is associated with functional reactivation of the left inferior frontal gyrus: a pilot study. Stroke 2014;45:545–52. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003192
    1. Spyridakou C, Luxon LM, Bamiou DE. Patient-reported speech in noise difficulties and hyperacusis symptoms and correlation with test results. Laryngoscope 2012;122:1609–14. 10.1002/lary.23337
    1. Musiek FE, Shinn JB, Jirsa R, et al. . Gin (gaps-in-noise) test performance in subjects with confirmed central auditory nervous system involvement. Ear Hear 2005;26:608–18. 10.1097/01.aud.0000188069.80699.41
    1. Goll JC, Crutch SJ, Loo JH, et al. . Non-verbal sound processing in the primary progressive aphasias. Brain 2010;133:272–85. 10.1093/brain/awp235
    1. Shewan CM, Kertesz A. Reliability and validity characteristics of the western aphasia battery (WAB). J Speech Hear Dis 1980;45:308–24. 10.1044/jshd.4503.308
    1. Meijer AGW, Wit HP, TenVergert EM, et al. . Reliability and validity of the (modified) Amsterdam inventory for auditory disability and handicap. Int J Audiol 2003;42:220–6. 10.3109/14992020309101317
    1. Bench J, Bamford J. Speech-hearing tests and the spoken language of hearing-impaired children. London: Academic Press, 1979.
    1. Kitterick PT, Lovett RE, Goman AM, et al. . The AB-York crescent of sound: an apparatus for assessing spatial-listening skills in children and adults. Cochlear Implants Int 2011;12: 164–9. 10.1179/146701011X13049348987832
    1. Wolfe J, Schafer EC, Heldner B, et al. . Evaluation of speech recognition in noise with cochlear implants and dynamic FM. J Am Acad Audiol 2009;20:409–21. 10.3766/jaaa.20.7.3
    1. Fisher N, Hall P. Bootstrap algorithms for small samples. Journal of statistical planning and inference 1991;27:157–69. 10.1016/0378-3758(91)90013-5
    1. Barber JA, Thompson SG. Analysis of cost data in randomized trials: an application of the non-parametric bootstrap. Stat Med 2000;19:3219–36. 10.1002/1097-0258(20001215)19:23<3219::AID-SIM623>;2-P
    1. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technology Assessment 2003;27:1–173. 10.3310/hta7270
    1. Button KS, Ioannidis JP, Mokrysz C, et al. . Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci 2013;14:365–76. 10.1038/nrn3475
    1. Ellis RJ, Munro KJ. Benefit from, and acclimatization to, frequency compression hearing aids in experienced adult hearing-aid users. Int J Audiol 2015;54:37–47. 10.3109/14992027.2014.948217
    1. Dawes P, Munro KJ, Kalluri S, et al. . Acclimatization to hearing aids. Ear Hear 2014;35:203–12. 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182a8eda4
    1. Rabbitt PMA. Mild hearing loss can cause apparent memory failures which increase with age and reduce with IQ. Acta Otolaryngol 1991;476:167–75; discussion 176.
    1. Kumar S, Sedley W, Nourski KV, et al. . Predictive coding and pitch processing in the auditory cortex. J Cogn Neurosci 2011;23:3084–94. 10.1162/jocn_a_00021
    1. Feldman H, Friston KJ. Attention, uncertainty, and free-energy. Front Hum Neurosci 2010;4:215 10.3389/fnhum.2010.00215
    1. Papoutsi M, de Zwart JA, Jansma JM, et al. . From phonemes to articulatory codes: an fMRI study of the role of Broca's area in speech production. Cereb Cortex 2009;19:2156–65. 10.1093/cercor/bhn239

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj