Effect of stimulation of auditory skills of speech-language pathologists to perceptual evaluation of vocal deviation

Pacheco, Letícia do Rosário Amado; Gielow, Ingrid; Madazio, Glaucya; Yamasaki, Rosiane; Behlau, Mara

doi:10.1590/2317-6431-2021-2569pt

Brasil

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

Original Article • Audiol., Commun. Res. 27 • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-6431-2021-2569en linkcopy

Effect of stimulation of auditory skills of speech-language pathologists to perceptual evaluation of vocal deviation

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Purpose To verify if the stimulation of auditory skills of speech therapists with and without difficulty in auditory processing (CAP) interferes in performance of auditory-perceptual assessment (APA) regarding predominant vocal deviation.

Methods Prospective, quasi-experimental study, conducted with 26 speech therapists and developed in five stages: Stage1: Pre-intervention - APA, composed of 30 samples of sustained vowel emissions /ε/, plus 20% repetition (six repeated samples) in which participants should identify the predominant vocal deviation. Stage2: Screening of CAP skills through nine tests of AudBility web platform. Stage3: Perceptual-auditory training of predominant vocal deviation and, later, second APA, identical to previous one. Stage4: Intervention - Stimulation of auditory skills (EHA) performed by 14 participants, eight of which failed the screening from Stage2 and six who passed th e screening and spontaneously performed EHA (Group G2a ). The other 12 participants did not perform EHA and formed the G2b Group. Stage5: Post-intervention - Third execution of APA, identical to previous, by all participants. Accuracy of analysis and intra-rater reliability were assessed in all APAs.

Results The three groups showed similar performances in the three APAs. G1 and G2a showed no improvement in the performance of the analysis of predominant vocal deviation after EHA. Pre-intervention intra-rater reliability in G1 was lower than in G2a and G2b in APA1 and APA2, and similar to them in APA3, post-intervention.

Conclusion Proposed EHA had no impact on APA accuracy, but influenced in intra-rater reliability of speech therapists with difficulty in the hearing skills of CAP.

Keywords: Auditory perception; Hearing tests; Voice training; Voice screening; Auditory processing

Tests from CAP skills screening	Number of students who failed the screening
	(% of group total)
	G1 (n=8)	G2a (n=6)	G2b (n=12)
	Failed + EHA	Passed + EHA	Passed, without EHA
Sound localization	-	-	-
Consonant-Vowel	-	-	-
Dichotic Digits (integration)	-	-	-
Competing dichotic listening	2	-	-
(disyllables)	-25%	-	-
Auditory Closure	-	-	-
Figure-Ground (ipsilateral)	-	-	-
Temporal Resolution	4	-	-
Temporal Resolution	-50%	-	-
Temporal Ordering (pitch)	6	-	-
Temporal Ordering (pitch)	-75%	-	-
Temporal Ordering (duration)	4	1	-
Temporal Ordering (duration)	-50%	-17%	-

p-value	Variables that influence performance in the APA
p-value	Group	Moment of APA	Moment of APA x Group
	0.656	0.009^* * Statistically significant value at the 5% level (p < 0.05)	0.471

Group	APA1 - Pre - EHA		APA2 - Post-vocal deviation training		APA3 - Post - EHA
Group	Average (%)	SD (%)	Average (%)	SD (%)	Average (%)	SD (%)	P-value
G1 (n=8)	70.8	4.27	74.2	7.51	76.7	6.17	0.122^b
Failed + EHA	70.8	4.27	74.2	7.51	76.7	6.17	0.122^b
G2a (n=6)	72.2	10.89	77.8	6.89	75.0	5.48	0.374^a
Passed + EHA	72.2	10.89	77.8	6.89	75.0	5.48	0.374^a
G2b (n=12)	72.2	6.72	75.0	7.04	80.3	5.77	0.018*^a
Passed, without EHA	72.2	6.72	75.0	7.04	80.3	5.77	0.018*^a

Group	Participant	APA1		APA2		APA3
Group	Participant	Kappa	p-value	Kappa	p-value	Kappa	p-value
G1	1	1.000	0.001*	0.400	0.050	1.000	0.001*
	2	0.333	0.075	0.714	0.012*	1.000	0.001*
	3	1.000	0.001*	0.455	0.135	0.333	0.257
	4	0.500	0.040*	0.217	0.309	-0.200	0.221
	5	0.714	0.012*	0.750	0.007*	0.739	0.007*
	6	0.429	0.109	0.182	0.439	0.700	0.024*
	7	0.308	0.186	0.500	0.040*	0.500	0.040*
	8	0.538	0.021*	0.500	0.040*	1.000	0.001*
G2a	1	1.000	0.001*	1.000	0.001*	0.714	0.012*
	2	0.250	0.303	0.700	0.024*	0.500	0.083
	3	1.000	0.001*	0.739	0.007*	0.714	0.023*
	4	0.500	0.040*	0.333	0.273	0.400	0.050
	5	0.250	0.257	1.000	0.001*	0.739	0.011*
	6	1.000	0.001*	0.500	0.083	1.000	0.001*
G2b	1	0.520	0.035*	0.750	0.007*	0.750	0.007*
	2	0.500	0.046*	0.250	0.317	0.250	0.303
	3	1.000	0.001*	0.714	0.012*	0.700	0.024*
	4	0.520	0.035*	0.739	0.007*	0.714	0.012*
	5	-0.304	0.292	0.750	0.007*	0.333	0.098
	6	0.500	0.046*	0.714	0.012*	0.333	0.098
	7	0.714	0.012*	0.500	0.070*	0.750	0.007*
	8	1.000	0.001*	0.217	0.309	0.750	0.007*
	9	0.714	0.012^* * Statistically significant value at the 5% level (p < 0.05)	0.714	0.012*	1.000	0.001*
	10	0.700	0.024*	0.667	0.083	0.100	0.748
	11	0.739	0.007*	0.750	0.007*	1.000	0.001*
	12	0.500	0.046*	0.520	0.035*	0.400	0.050

vertical_align_top file_download show_chart

more_horizclose
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

Academia Brasileira de Audiologia Rua Itapeva, 202, conjunto 61, CEP 01332-000, Tel.: (11) 3253-8711 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista@audiologiabrasil.org.br

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

[1] Subtitle: EHA = stimulation of auditory skills; G1 = group that didn’t pass the screening of auditory skills and performed EHA; G2a = group that passed the screening of auditory skills and performed EHA; G2b = group that passed the screening of auditory skills and didn’t perform EHA; - = no student failed this test