Your search

  • Background: While maximum isometric pressure (MIP) is widely used in clinical and research settings, reduced lingual swallow pressure (LSP) has been observed in patients with dysphagia and in older healthy adults. However, limited evidence exists on the test–retest reliability of LSP across different bolus consistencies. Objective: This study assessed the test–retest reliability of LSP measurements in both younger and older adults with healthy swallowing function to identify factors influencing oral swallowing pressure. Methods: Participants 18–40 years (younger) and 60+ years (older) were assessed across four separate sessions. Bolus types included trials of saliva, thin, mildly thick and extremely thick water, randomised across study visits. Two-way mixed effects models with absolute agreement were used to calculate intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and evaluate test–retest reliability of LSP for each swallow type (regular or effortful) and bolus type. Linear mixed effects regression modelling was used to examine the factors influencing LSP. Results: A total of 51 participants were included. Test–retest reliability for LSP ranged from good to excellent across both groups (ICC = 0.79–0.98). Reliability was non-significantly higher in the older group (ICC = 0.96) and during effortful swallows (ICC = 0.94). Effort level significantly influenced LSP estimates, with effortful swallows producing about 1.83 times more lingual pressure than regular swallows. There were no significant effects of age, sex, or bolus type on LSP. Conclusion: These findings suggest that LSP measurements are reliable across measurement time points in nondysphagic participants, regardless of age, effort level, or bolus type. Only swallow effort level significantly influenced LSP estimates. © 2025 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

  • Nasopharyngoscopy is a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure that allows visual observation and analysis of the velopharyngeal mechanism during speech. It can be used to assess both anatomic and physiologic abnormalities of the velopharyngeal valve. In cases of suspected velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI), nasopharyngoscopy is particularly useful in determining the size, location, and cause of the velopharyngeal opening. This information is very important for surgical planning. Nasopharyngoscopy is also useful in the assessment of secondary surgery that was done for VPI. It can help determine the need for revision and the type of revision surgery that is most likely to be successful. The purpose of the chapter is to explain how nasopharyngoscopy is used in the evaluation of velopharyngeal function. This chapter includes specific tips for achieving a successful examination in children as young as age 3. Finally, important observations from nasopharyngoscopy are described. © 2025 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

  • PURPOSE: Autistic adults consistently report difficulties understanding speech in adverse listening environments, which may be related to differences in social communication and participation. Research examining masked-speech recognition in autistic adults is limited, particularly in competing speech backgrounds with high degrees of informational masking. This work characterizes speech-in-speech and speech-in-noise recognition in young adults on the autism spectrum, as well as evaluates self-reported functional listening abilities and listening-related fatigue. METHOD: Masked-speech recognition was evaluated in both autistic (n = 20) and non-autistic (n = 20) young adults with normal hearing. Speech reception thresholds were adaptively measured in two-talker speech and speech-shaped noise using target sentences that were either semantically meaningful or anomalous. Functional listening abilities and listening-related fatigue were assessed using the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale and the Vanderbilt Fatigue Scale for Adults. Autism characteristics and social communication experiences were quantified using the Social Responsiveness Scale-Second Edition. RESULTS: Autistic adults displayed significantly poorer speech-in-speech recognition than their non-autistic peers, while speech-in-noise recognition did not differ between groups. Functional listening difficulties in daily life and listening-related fatigue were significantly higher for autistic participants. Autism characteristics strongly predicted functional listening abilities and listening-related fatigue in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Autistic young adults experience objective speech-in-speech recognition difficulties that correspond with listening challenges in daily life. Autism characteristics and social communication experiences predict functional listening abilities reported by both autistic and non-autistic young adults with normal hearing. Speech-in-speech recognition difficulties observed here may amplify social communication challenges for adults on the autism spectrum. Future work must prioritize improved awareness of autistic listening differences.

  • Narrative language samples can be used to measure language development in children, but research on narrative development in deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children is scarce, limiting knowledge of developmental stages and best practices for collection and analysis. This scoping review included 39 articles that explored recent methodologies and achievements in oral or signed narratives of DHH children, including comparisons with hearing peers and within-group analyses of early auditory experience, device use, and other measures. Articles featured DHH participants aged < 4 to 18 years, varying in device use, communication modalities, and educational settings. Most studies utilized story generation tasks with early elementary-aged children and analyzed either microstructure or macrostructure. Mixed results in comparisons with hearing children emphasized the need to consider individual differences (e.g., speech perception and age of spoken language access) in DHH narrative assessments. Findings also suggest that comparability across studies would be improved by more consistent terminology and procedures in narrative collection/analysis.

Last update from database: 3/25/26, 6:13 PM (UTC)

Explore