JCPSLP
Volume 16, Number 2 2014
77
Cognitive Concepts. (1997).
Earobics: Auditory
development and phonics program
[Computer software].
Cambridge, MA: Author.
Emanuel, D. C., Ficca, K. N., & Korczak, P. (2011). Survey
of the diagnosis and management of auditory processing
disorder.
American Journal of Audiology
,
20
(1), 448–60.
Ferre, J. M. (2006). Management strategies for APD.
In T. K. Parthasarathy (Ed.),
An introduction to auditory
processing disorders in children
(pp. 161–186). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fey M. E., Richard G. J., Geffner, D., Kamhi, A. G.,
Medwetsky, L., Paul, D., … Schooling, T. (2011). Auditory
processing disorders and auditory/language interventions:
An evidence-based systematic review.
Language, Speech,
and Hearing Services in Schools
,
42
, 246–264.
Gardner, M. Y. (1997).
Test of auditory perceptual skills –
Revised
. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Hind, S. (2006). Survey of care pathway for auditory
processing disorder.
Audiological Medicine
,
4
, 12–24.
Kamhi, A. G. (2011). What speech-language pathologists
need to know about auditory processing disorder.
Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools
,
42
, 265–272.
Logue-Kennedy, M., Lyons, R., Carroll, C., Byrne, M.,
Dignan, E., & O’Hagan, L. (2011). Services for children
with central auditory processing disorder in the Republic
of Ireland: Current and future service provision.
American
Journal of Audiology
,
20
, 9–18.
McArthur, G. M., Ellis, D., Atkinson, C. M., & Coltheart,
M. (2008). Auditory processing deficits in children with
reading and language impairments: Can they (and should
they) be treated?
Cognition
,
107
(3), 946–977.
Scientific Learning Corporation. (1998).
Fast ForWord
[Computer software]. Berkeley, CA: Author.
Sharma, M., Purdy, S. C., & Kelly, A. S. (2009).
Comorbidity of auditory processing, language, and reading
disorders.
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing
Research
,
52
(3), 706–722.
Strong, G. K., Torgerson, C. J., Torgerson, D., &
Hulme, C. (2011). A systematic meta-analytic review of
the evidence for the effectiveness of the “Fast ForWord”
language intervention program.
Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry
,
52
(3), 224–235.
Speech Pathology Australia (2003).
Scope of practice
.
Available from: www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au/
library/Core_Assoc_Doc/Scope_of_Practice.pdf
Wallach, G.P. (2011). Peeling the onion of auditory
processing disorder: A language/curricular-based
perspective.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in
Schools
,
42
, 273–285.
Wilson, W. J., & Arnott, W. (2012). Evidence about
the effectiveness of interventions for auditory processing
disorder. In L. Wong & L. Hickson (Eds.),
Evidence-based
practice in audiology: Evaluating interventions for children
and adults with hearing impairment
(pp. 283–308). San
Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.
In addition to direct language treatments, SLPs teach
children with (C)APD a range of compensatory strategies,
with requesting repetition or clarification being deemed the
most effective. A range of environmental modifications are
also implemented with checking a child’s comprehension of
verbal information, visual supports, repetition or rephrasing
of verbal information, preferential seating in the classroom,
and pre-teaching new information/vocabulary being seen
as the most effective. Emanuel et al. (2011) reported such
strategies are widely recommended by audiologists in the
United States, although to date there is no evidence confirming
any benefit from these strategies in children with (C)APD.
With respect to treatment outcomes, all except three SLPs
surveyed indicated that they routinely measure the outcomes
of their interventions with children with (C)APD; however, there
was little consistency with respect to the measurements used.
Most clinicians (58%) favoured standardised measures such
as the Test of Auditory Perceptual Skills – Revised (TAPS-R)
(Gardner, 1997). The present findings indicate that auditory
processing deficits are not easily remediated. The amount
of time taken to treat children with (C)APD varied, with
approximately one-third of clinicians reporting that
treatment takes over 18 months. Further, approximately
60% of SLPs indicated that at least 50% of children with
(C)APD still required treatment after being discharged.
There are some limitations to the study. All participants
did not complete the full survey which is acknowledged
as a limitation of the present study. Twenty-five percent of
participants skipped some items, particularly the open-
ended questions. As a result, some items only had a small
number of responses. Further, participants’ open-ended
responses often lacked detail and the survey did not
allow respondents to explain why they found the specific
treatments to be effective or ineffective, making it difficult
to draw firm conclusions regarding the reasons these
treatments were being used. Finally, it is important to
acknowledge that the results reflect only the practice of
Queensland SLPs. Accordingly, further research is needed
to determine whether the present findings are consistent
with SLP management of children with (C)APD elsewhere.
Conclusions
Queensland SLPs’ management of children with (C)APD is
generally consistent with the recommendations made in the
literature, with most clinicians treating the language and
literacy deficits associated with the disorder rather than
focusing on specific auditory deficits. The present study also
shows that these SLPs are using direct treatments involving
individualised language, phonological awareness, and
phoneme discrimination tasks with children with (C)APD, as
well as compensatory strategies. Researchers and clinicians
now need to work together to gather evidence that will
support or reject the use of these treatments and strategies.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by a Speech Pathologist’s Board
of Queensland Enhancing Clinical Practice Grant awarded
to the first author.
References
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2005).
(Central) auditory processing disorders – The role of the
audiologist
[Position statement]. Available from www.asha.
org/policy.
Arnott, W. L., Henning, C. A., & Wilson, W. J. (2014).
Screening and assessing for (central) auditory processing
disorder and the role of the speech-language pathologist: A
survey of Queensland clinicians.
Journal of Clinical Practice
in Speech-Language Pathology
,
16
(2), 66–72.
Wendy Arnott
is a lecturer in speech pathology and
Wayne
Wilson
is a senior lecturer in audiology at the University of
Queensland.
Caroline Henning
is a speech pathologist now
working in private practice who has worked extensively as a
researcher with Wendy and Wayne on studies in the areas of
(C)APD and language and literacy disorders.
Correspondence to:
Wendy Arnott
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences
The University of Queensland
Brisbane 4072, Australia
email:
