Use of Electropalatography to Improve Speech Sound Production

Hearing Impairment Clinical Trial

Official title:

The Use of Electropalatography to Improve Speech Sound Production in Deaf Adults With Cochlear Implants

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Withdrawn

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT04055987
• Other study ID #: 04190121
• Status: Withdrawn
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: September 30, 2019
• Est. completion date: June 1, 2020

Study information

• Verified date: September 2019
• Source: Molloy College
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The purpose of this proposed study is to examine the benefits of using electropalatography (EPG) during speech therapy with adult individuals who are either congenitally deaf or adventitiously deaf and use a cochlear implant.

Description:

It has been established in numerous research studies that there is a definitive link between speech perception and speech production, in that what one can perceive, one can produce. Hearing loss disrupts this link and while cochlear implants make a significant difference in perception of sound, adults who are deaf and receive a cochlear implant (CI) do not gain the same perceptual benefits as children who are deaf and are implanted at a young age. Thus, the speech production of the adult CI user is reported to be less intelligible. The purpose of this proposed study is to examine the benefits of using electropalatography (EPG) during speech therapy with adult individuals who are either congenitally deaf or adventitiously deaf and use a cochlear implant. The investigators have proposed to study 10 CI users (5 in each etiological group) who will undergo speech intelligibility testing, and receive speech therapy (1x/week for 10 weeks) using EPG that provides both visual (biofeedback) and auditory feedback. It is hypothesized that the biofeedback in addition to the auditory feedback from the CI will result in an increase in articulation skills and thus the speech intelligibility in these individuals will improve significantly.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Withdrawn
• Enrollment: 0
• Est. completion date: June 1, 2020
• Est. primary completion date: April 30, 2020
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• All participants in this study will be at least 3 years post-implant and they must use the implants consistently.

• Participants who have adventitious/acquired hearing loss must have had normal hearing through their 18th year.

• Participants with congenital hearing loss will have received oral or total communication education, worn hearing aids and consider themselves to be "oral deaf" adults.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Individuals who do not meet this criteria will be excluded from the protocol.

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Deafness
• Hearing Impairment
• Hearing Loss

Intervention

Behavioral:
• Visual biofeedback, auditory feedback and models
The EPG software program allows the speech clinician to model and comment upon the visual patterns during tongue/palate contact and to replay the participant's production for additional correction or reinforcement productions. Auditory feedback will be used to facilitate participant's perception of differences in production.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
n/a

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Molloy College

References & Publications (21)

Bernhardt B, Gick B, Bacsfalvi P, Ashdown J. Speech habilitation of hard of hearing adolescents using electropalatography and ultrasound as evaluated by trained listeners. Clin Linguist Phon. 2003 Apr-May;17(3):199-216. — View Citation

Bernhardt, B. H., Loyst, D., Pichora-Fuller, K., & Williams, R. (2000). Speech production outcomes before and after palotometry for a child with a cochlear implant. Journal-Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology, 33, 11-38.

Byun TM, Hitchcock ER. Investigating the use of traditional and spectral biofeedback approaches to intervention for /r/ misarticulation. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Aug;21(3):207-21. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0083). Epub 2012 Mar 21. — View Citation

Dagenais PA, Critz-Crosby P. Consonant lingual-palatal contacts produced by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children. J Speech Hear Res. 1991 Dec;34(6):1423-35. — View Citation

Dagenais PA. Electropalatography in the treatment of articulation/phonological disorders. J Commun Disord. 1995 Dec;28(4):303-29. — View Citation

Fabus, R., Raphael, L., Gatzonis, S., Dondorf, K., Giardina, K., Cron, S., & Badke, B. (2015). Preliminary case studies investigating the use of electropalatography (EPG) manufactured by CompleteSpeech® as a biofeedback tool in intervention. International Journal, 3(1), 11-23.

Fletcher SG, Dagenais PA, Critz-Crosby P. Teaching consonants to profoundly hearing-impaired speakers using palatometry. J Speech Hear Res. 1991 Aug;34(4):929-42. — View Citation

Fletcher SG, Hasegawa A. Speech modification by a deaf child through dynamic orometric modeling and feedback. J Speech Hear Disord. 1983 May;48(2):178-85. — View Citation

Fletcher, S., Hasegawa, A., McCutcheon, M., & Gilliom, J. (1980). Use of linguapalatal contact patterns to modify articulation in a deaf adult. In D. L. McPherso (Ed.), Advances in prosthetic devices for the deaf: A technical workshop (pp.127-133). Rochester, MD: NTID Press.

Gibbon, F., Stewart, F., Hardcastle, W. J., & Crampin, L. (1999). Widening access to electropalatography for children with persistent sound system disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 8(4), 319-334.

Goldman, R., & Goldman, F. M. (2000). Fristoe Test of Articulation. American Guidance Service.

Lane H, Perkell J, Svirsky M, Webster J. Changes in speech breathing following cochlear implant in postlingually deafened adults. J Speech Hear Res. 1991 Jun;34(3):526-33. — View Citation

Martin, K. L., Hirson, A., Herman, R., Thomas, J., & Pring, T. (2007). The efficacy of speech intervention using electropalatography with an 18-year-old deaf client: A single case study. Advances in Speech Language Pathology, 9(1), 46- 56.

McGarr NS. The intelligibility of deaf speech to experienced and inexperienced listeners. J Speech Hear Res. 1983 Sep;26(3):451-8. — View Citation

McGarr, N. S., Raphael, L. J., Kolia, B., Vorperian, H. K., & Harris, K. (2004). Sibilant production in speakers who have hearing loss: Electropalatographic and perceptual evidence. The Volta Review, 104(3), 119.

Pantelemidou V, Herman R, Thomas J. Efficacy of speech intervention using electropalatography with a cochlear implant user. Clin Linguist Phon. 2003 Jun-Aug;17(4-5):383-92. — View Citation

Parsloe R. Use of the speech pattern audiometer and the electropalatograph to explore the speech production/perception relationship in a profoundly deaf child. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1998 Jan-Mar;33(1):109-21. — View Citation

Pratt, S. R. (2007). Using electropalatographic feedback to treat the speech of a child with severe-to-profound hearing loss. The Journal of Speech and Language Pathology-Applied Behavior Analysis, 2(2), 213.

Shriberg, L. D. (1980). An intervention procedure for children with persistent /r/ errors. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 11(2), 102-110. SmartPalate Overview. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://completespeech.com/smartpalate/smartpalate_overview/

Subtenly, J. D., Orlando, N. A., & Whitehead, R. L. (1981). Speech and voice characteristics of the deaf. Washington, DC: The Alexander Graham Bell Association of the Deaf.

Waldstein RS. Effects of postlingual deafness on speech production: implications for the role of auditory feedback. J Acoust Soc Am. 1990 Nov;88(5):2099-114. — View Citation

* Note: There are 21 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Improved Speech Intelligibility	Change from baseline in speech intelligibility within a 10 week period after exposed to visual display of speech sound production.	10 weeks.