Cognitive performance and long-latency auditory evoked potentials: a study on aging

Relationships Between Auditory Processing and Cognitive Abilities in Adults: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The contributions from the central auditory and cognitive systems play a major role in communication. Understanding the relationship between auditory and cognitive abilities has implications for auditory rehabilitation for clinical patients. The purpose of this systematic review is to address the question, "In adults, what is the relationship between central auditory processing abilities and cognitive abilities?"

METHOD

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to identify, screen, and determine eligibility for articles that addressed the research question of interest. Medical librarians and subject matter experts assisted in search strategy, keyword review, and structuring the systematic review process. To be included, articles needed to have an auditory measure (either behavioral or electrophysiologic), a cognitive measure that assessed individual ability, and the measures needed to be compared to one another.

RESULTS

Following two rounds of identification and screening, 126 articles were included for full analysis. Central auditory processing (CAP) measures were grouped into categories (behavioral: speech in noise, altered speech, temporal processing, binaural processing; electrophysiologic: mismatch negativity, P50, N200, P200, and P300). The most common CAP measures were sentence recognition in speech-shaped noise and the P300. Cognitive abilities were grouped into constructs, and the most common construct was working memory. The findings were mixed, encompassing both significant and nonsignificant relationships; therefore, the results do not conclusively establish a direct link between CAP and cognitive abilities. Nonetheless, several consistent relationships emerged across different domains. Distorted or noisy speech was related to working memory or processing speed. Auditory temporal order tasks showed significant relationships with working memory, fluid intelligence, or multidomain cognitive measures. For electrophysiology, relationships were observed between some cortical evoked potentials and working memory or executive/inhibitory processes. Significant results were consistent with the hypothesis that assessments of CAP and cognitive processing would be positively correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this systematic review summarize relationships between CAP and cognitive processing, but also underscore the complexity of these constructs, the importance of study design, and the need to select an appropriate measure. The relationship between auditory and cognitive abilities is complex but can provide informative context when creating clinical management plans. This review supports a need to develop guidelines and training for audiologists who wish to consider individual central auditory and cognitive abilities in patient care.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24855174.

Changes in Auditory Evoked Potentials Increase the Chances of Adults Having Central Auditory Processing Disorder

Introduction  Auditory evoked potentials are widely used in clinical practice to complement the assessment of central auditory processing. However, it is necessary to understand whether these potentials are highly accurate, to assist in the diagnosis of auditory processing disorder. Objective  To measure the accuracy of middle and long latency auditory evoked potentials in the diagnosis of auditory processing disorder in adults. Methods  This is a case-control study, formed by a control group of 30 individuals with normal auditory processing assessment, and a case group composed of 43 individuals with altered auditory processing assessment. Their sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, positive and negative predictive values for the diagnosis of alterations were measured and compared between the potentials. Results  The accuracies of the middle and long latency potentials were 51% and 67%, respectively. The P1-N1-P2 and N2-P300 complexes had an accuracy of 57.5% and 58.9%, respectively. The cognitive potential P300 showed an accuracy of 55%. There was no significant result for the middle-latency potential (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 0.6-5.4, p  > 0.42) and for P300 (OR = 2.63, 95% CI: 0.85-8.43, p  > 0.11). However, the result was significant for the long-latency potential (OR = 6.3; 95% CI: 2-19.6, p  < 0.01). There was a significant result for the P1-N1-P2 complexes (OR = 6.76, 95% CI:1.4-32.5, p  = < 0.010) and N2-P300 (OR = 3.60; 95% CI: 10.16-11.20, p  < 0.039). Conclusion  Individuals with altered long-latency auditory evoked potential are more likely to have auditory processing disorder and, as such, this test can be used as a complementary tool to confirm the diagnosis.

Parameters of Auditory Evoked Related Potentials P300 in Disorders of Different Cognitive Function Domains (Visuospatial/Executive and Memory) in Elderly Hypertensive Persons

The neurophysiological correlates of certain types of cognitive impairment in relation to the spatial pattern of auditory cognitive evoked-related potentials (ERPs) in hypertensive persons remain unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the parameters of ERPs (N200, P300) in impaired different domains (visuospatial/executive and memory) of cognitive function in arterial hypertension, including cardiovascular ischemic events. A total of 46 patients (65-84 years) were observed. The clinical diagnosis of vascular dementia, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA test) and the spatial pattern of ERPs (N200, P300) were the parameters used to identify three groups: the Control Group without cognitive impairment (n = 13), the group with a leading memory disturbance (Memory Group, n = 20) and the group with a leading visuospatial/executive disturbance (VS/E Group, n = 13). In persons belonging to the Memory Group, N2 latency was prolonged in the central (C3 C4) and right parietal (P4) brain parts; latency of the motor component (P300) may remain similar to that of the ControlGroup. In persons belonging to theVS/E Group, maximal prolonged recognition time (N2), especially in the left central (C3), frontal-midline (Fz), right parietal (P3) and temporal (P4) brain parts, was observed; P300 latency in the central-midline (Cz) and left anterior-temporal (F7) brain parts among all the groups was revealed.