Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Renata Alonso
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Doctoral Thesis |
| Press: | São Paulo. |
| Institution: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Faculdade de Medicina (FM/SBD) |
| Defense date: | 2012-02-16 |
| Examining board members: |
Eliane Schochat;
Katia de Almeida;
Renata Mota Mamede de Carvallo;
Daniela Gil;
Ivone Ferreira Neves Lobo
|
| Advisor: | Eliane Schochat |
| Abstract | |
INTRODUCTION: Elderly individuals usually present (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder which contribute for the deterioration of quality of life and affect the social relations of such individuals. The Auditory Training is a broadly used technique in the rehabilitation of individuals with (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder and its effectiveness may be evidenced by behavioral and electrophysiological tests. AIMS: This study aimed to characterize the (Central) Auditory Processing in elderly individuals and to verify the effectiveness of Auditory Training in elderly with (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder. METHODS: 15 individuals with (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder (Study Group) and 13 individuals without (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder (Control Group), ranging in age from 60 to 79 years old, took part in the study. All subjects underwent an initial behavioral assessment of (Central) Auditory Processing and a first recording of N1-P2- N2 complex and of P300 (electrophysiological assessment). The Study Group underwent an Auditory Training program in acoustic booth for eight sessions, and a month later new behavioral and electrophysiological assessments were performed. The Control Group underwent a Visual Training during eight weeks, and a month later a new electrophysiological assessment was performed. RESULTS: There was a significant statistical difference between the Study Group and the Control Group in the behavioral assessment and in the situations pre and post Auditory Training in the Study Group in Dichotic Digit and Frequency Pattern tests. Concerning the electrophysiological data, no significant differences were found between the groups in the initial assessment; after the Auditory and the Visual Training there was a significant statistical difference between the groups in the latency of N1, P2 and N2. Comparing the Study Group before and after the Auditory Training, there was a statistically significant difference for the latency of N2; and comparing the Control Group before and after the Visual Training, there was a significant difference for the latency of P2 and the amplitude of N1P2. CONCLUSIONS: The Study Group presented worse performance in the behavioral assessment of the (Central) Auditory Processing when compared to the Control Group, and both groups presented similar electrophysiological responses before the Auditory and the Visual Training. The Auditory Training improved the performance of (Central) Auditory Processing skills in the Study Group, and this improvement could also be verified in the latency decrease of waves N1, P2 and N2 and in the increase of P300 amplitude, after the Auditory Training (AU) | |