No abstract

Purpose: The main purpose of this retrospective study was to identify auditory dysfunctions related to traumatic brain injury (TBI) in individuals evaluated in an Audiology clinic. Method: Peripheral and central auditory evaluations were performed from March 2014 to June 2018 in 26 patients (14 males) with TBI. The age of the participants ranged from 9 to 59 years old (34.24 ± 15.21). Six participants had blast-related TBI and 20 had blunt force TBI. Sixteen experienced a single TBI event whereas ten experienced several. Correlation analyses were performed to verify the relationship, if any, between the number of auditory tests failed and the number, type, and severity of TBIs. Result: All participants failed at least one auditory test. Nearly 60% had abnormal results on degraded speech tests (compressed and echoed, filtered or in background noise) and 25% had a high frequency hearing loss. There was no statistically significant correlation between the number of auditory tests failed and the number, type, and severity of TBIs. Conclusion: Results indicated negative and heterogenous effects of TBI on peripheral and central auditory function and highlighted the need for a more extensive auditory assessment in individuals with TBI.

Background: Auditory processing disorders (APD) may be one of the problems experienced by children with listening difficulties (LiD). The combination of auditory behavioural and electrophysiological tests could help to provide a better understanding of the abilities/disabilities of children with LiD. The current study aimed to quantify the auditory processing abilities and function in children with LiD. Methods: Twenty children, ten with LiD (age = 8.46; SD = 1.39) and ten typically developing (TD) (age = 9.45; SD = 1.57) participated in this study. All children were evaluated with auditory processing tests as well as with attention and phonemic synthesis tasks. Electrophysiological measures were also conducted with click and speech auditory brainstem responses (ABR). Results: Children with LiD performed significantly worse than TD children for most behavioural tasks, indicating shortcomings in functional auditory processing. Moreover, the click-ABR wave I amplitude was smaller, and the speech-ABR waves D and E latencies were longer for the LiD children compared to the results of TD children. No significant difference was found when evaluating neural correlates between groups. Conclusions: Combining behavioural testing with click-ABR and speech-ABR can highlight functional and neurophysiological deficiencies in children with learning and listening issues, especially at the brainstem level.

Objectif : produire une traduction en français canadien de l’AMSTAR 2, en affirmer la validité de contenu et en examiner la fidélité interjuges. Méthodologie : selon une approche adaptée de celle proposée par Vallerand, des traductions directes et renversées ont été effectuées. Ensuite, en examinant les traductions, un premier comité d’experts a créé la version expérimentale préliminaire. Celle-ci a été modifiée par un deuxième comité d’experts. Vingt futurs professionnels de la santé ont évalué la nouvelle version avec une échelle d’ambiguïté (de 1 à 7). Les cochercheurs principaux ont examiné les éléments problématiques pour affermir la version préofficielle. Afin d’assurer la validité de contenu, une dernière rétrotraduction a été effectuée, validant une version officielle. Ensuite, 4 juges ont évalué 13 revues systématiques publiées en français à l’aide de la version officielle. Le coefficient kappa a été utilisé afin d’examiner la fidélité interjuges. Résultats : cette adaptation a permis la création d’une version franco-canadienne de l’AMSTAR 2. Son utilisation a démontré très peu d’ambiguïté (moyenne 1,15; ÉT 0,26) et une bonne fidélité interjuges (Kappa global > 0,64). Conclusion : la version franco-canadienne de l’AMSTAR 2 pourrait servir de soutien aux cliniciens, aux éducateurs et aux gestionnaires francophones au Canada lorsqu’ils cherchent à adopter une pratique factuelle.