Suppr超能文献

听觉处理障碍及其共病:测试截止分数需要一致性。

Auditory Processing Disorder and Its Comorbidities: A Need for Consistency in Test Cutoff Scores.

机构信息

Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Am J Audiol. 2021 Mar 10;30(1):128-144. doi: 10.1044/2020_AJA-20-00103. Epub 2021 Mar 3.

Abstract

Purpose No gold standard criteria exist for diagnosing developmental auditory processing disorder (APD). This study aimed to identify APD criteria, which are consistent with that used for comorbidities, and how comorbidities predicted APD. Method A retrospective study of 167 participants (males = 105, females = 62; age: 6-16 years; nonverbal IQ > 80) with suspected APD is presented. Five SCAN-3 tests evaluated auditory processing (AP). Comorbidities included attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, language impairment, and impaired manual dexterity, which were identified using percentile ≤ 5 in the Swanson, Nolan and Pelham parental rating scale; Children's Communication Checklist-2; and Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2, respectively. Results Percentiles ≤ 9, ≤ 5, and < 2 in two or more AP tests had sensitivities (specificities) of 76% (70.6%), 59.3% (76.5%), and 26% (82.4%), respectively, in predicting comorbidities, which were present in 150 of the 167 participants. The criterion of "≤ 9 percentile in two or more AP tests" (Approach I) diagnosed APD in 119 participants, and criterion "≤ 5 percentile in two or more AP tests or ≤ 5 percentile in one AP plus one or more measures of comorbidities" (Approach II) diagnosed 123. The combination of approaches diagnosed 128 participants (76.6%) with APD, of which 114 were diagnosed by each approach (89%). Language impairment and impaired manual dexterity, but not attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, predicted APD. Conclusions "Percentile ≤ 9 in two or more AP tests" or "percentile ≤ 5 in one AP plus one or more measures of comorbidities" are evidence-based APD diagnostic criteria. Holistic and interprofessional practice evaluating comorbidities including motor skills is important for APD.

摘要

目的

目前尚无诊断发育性听觉加工障碍(APD)的金标准标准。本研究旨在确定与共病一致的 APD 标准,以及共病如何预测 APD。

方法

本研究回顾性分析了 167 名疑似 APD 患者(男性 105 名,女性 62 名;年龄:6-16 岁;非言语智商>80)的资料。使用 SCAN-3 测试评估听觉处理(AP)。使用 Swanson、Nolan 和 Pelham 父母评定量表、儿童沟通检查表-2 和儿童运动评估电池-2 的百分位数≤5,分别确定注意缺陷/多动障碍、语言障碍和运动技能障碍等共病。

结果

两个或更多 AP 测试的百分位数≤9、≤5 和<2,分别预测 150 名参与者中的共病的敏感性(特异性)为 76%(70.6%)、59.3%(76.5%)和 26%(82.4%)。“两个或更多 AP 测试中百分位数≤9”(方法 I)诊断 119 名参与者的 APD,“两个或更多 AP 测试中百分位数≤5 或一个 AP 测试中百分位数≤5 加一个或多个共病测量”(方法 II)诊断 123 名参与者。两种方法结合诊断 128 名参与者(76.6%)患有 APD,其中 114 名参与者分别通过两种方法诊断(89%)。语言障碍和运动技能障碍,但不是注意缺陷/多动障碍,预测 APD。

结论

“两个或更多 AP 测试中百分位数≤9”或“一个 AP 测试中百分位数≤5 加一个或多个共病测量”是基于证据的 APD 诊断标准。评估包括运动技能在内的共病的整体和多专业实践对于 APD 很重要。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验