Purpose: Central auditory processing disorder ([C]APD) is a relatively recent construct that has given rise to 2 theoretical models: the Buffalo Model and the Bellis/Ferre Model. These models describe 4 and 5 (C)APD categories, respectively. The present study examines the applicability of these models to clinical practice. Neither of these models was based on data from peer-reviewed sources. Method: This is a retrospective study that reviewed 178 records of children diagnosed with (C)APD, of which 48 were retained for analysis. Results: More than 80% of the children could be classified into one of the Buffalo Model categories, while more than 90% remained unclassified under the Bellis/Ferre Model. This discrepancy can be explained by the fact that the classification of the Buffalo Model is based primarily on a single central auditory test (Staggered Spondaic Word), whereas the Bellis/Ferre Model classification uses a combination of auditory test results. Conclusion: The 2 models provide a conceptual framework for (C)APD, but they must be further refined to be fully applicable in clinical settings.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of auditory training in noise on auditory behaviors and life habits in children with auditory processing disorder. Methods: Ten children with auditory processing disorder underwent an auditory training program in noise and six children with auditory processing disorder comprised a control group. Before and after training, participants were tested on sentence identification in noise and auditory evoked late latency responses. Participants teachers completed two questionnaires on children’s auditory behaviors and life habits. Results: Participants were more tolerant to noise as the training sessions progressed. Significant between-group differences were found in P1 and N2 latency measures, independent of measurement time. The observed data trends suggest that some participants improved their performance on the sentence identification task in noise as well as on some electrophysiological parameters. No significant differences in questionnaire scores were found between groups or measurement times. However, one questionnaire showed significant between-group differences for certain questions. Conclusions: Listening in noise can improve with training for children with auditory processing disorder. However, this training program might be beneficial for some, but not all, children with auditory processing disorder. More data are needed to verify individual data trends.

Purpose: Binaural integration is assessed by dichotic listening tests. This study aimed to assess the development of binaural integration ability using a newly developed dichotic digit test in French. Method: Twenty-eight children with normal hearing sensitivity and binaural integration capacity, assessed with a dichotic listening word test, participated in the study. The children were divided into 3 groups: nine 6-year-olds, nine 9-year-olds, and ten 12-year-olds. They completed 4 subtests with earphones at normal conversational level. Three subtests consisted of 1, 2, and 3 different digit pairs, respectively, between 1 and 9 that were sent dichotically to the ears. The fourth subtest consisted of 4 digits, but only the 2 middle digits were sent dichotically. Results: Performance improved significantly as a function of age and decreased with increasing number of digits to be repeated. All groups performed significantly better on digits presented in the right ear than the left ear, and on the digit rather than the word test. Conclusion: The new French dichotic digit test would be useful in assessing binaural integration in children. The 4 subtests make it suitable for inclusion in a test battery to assess central auditory processing in children and are an alternative, especially the fourth subtest, to the French version of the Staggered Spondaic Word Test (Rudmin & Normandin, 1983).