Audiologic/Aural Rehabilitation is Valued and Necessary John O’Neill is the subject of the second article contributed by Special Interest Division 7, Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation, highlighting the work of master clinicians in audiologic/aural rehabilitation (AR). While in his doctoral program at Ohio State University, O’Neill worked in an AR program under the direction of staff ... Features
Free
Features  |   June 01, 2007
Audiologic/Aural Rehabilitation is Valued and Necessary
Author Notes
  • Joseph Montano, AdD, CCC-A, is director of audiology and speech-language pathology at New York Presbyterian Hospital-Weill Cornell Medical Center. Montano’s clinical expertise is audiologic rehabilitation with a particular interest in adjustment to adult-onset hearing loss, hearing assistive technology systems, and hearing aids. Contact him at jjm2003@med.cornell.edu.
    Joseph Montano, AdD, CCC-A, is director of audiology and speech-language pathology at New York Presbyterian Hospital-Weill Cornell Medical Center. Montano’s clinical expertise is audiologic rehabilitation with a particular interest in adjustment to adult-onset hearing loss, hearing assistive technology systems, and hearing aids. Contact him at jjm2003@med.cornell.edu.×
Article Information
Audiologic / Aural Rehabilitation / Features
Features   |   June 01, 2007
Audiologic/Aural Rehabilitation is Valued and Necessary
The ASHA Leader, June 2007, Vol. 12, 5-6. doi:10.1044/leader.FTR2.12082007.5
The ASHA Leader, June 2007, Vol. 12, 5-6. doi:10.1044/leader.FTR2.12082007.5
John O’Neill is the subject of the second article contributed by Special Interest Division 7, Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation, highlighting the work of master clinicians in audiologic/aural rehabilitation (AR). While in his doctoral program at Ohio State University, O’Neill worked in an AR program under the direction of staff that included three individuals from the Army and another from the Navy AR programs. The intensive residential program included hearing aid evaluation and dispensing, individual and group speechreading, and auditory training along with psychological counseling. He served on the Ohio State faculty and then joined the faculty at the University of Illinois, where currently he is professor emeritus. O’Neill became one of the founders of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology (ARA), and has served as its president. He was ASHA president in 1969.
You have published and presented extensively on the complementary nature of vision and audition. What do you think is the historical impact of speechreading on the professions of audiology and speech-language pathology?
Speechreading along with auditory training was one of the approaches to working individually with people who have hearing impairments that enabled audiology to separate from education of the deaf. Once audiology began to work with people who are hard of hearing, it utilized a therapeutic model that gave some emphasis to the need for speech training. Thus audiology and speech-language pathology needed to interact with each other.
Some of our colleagues believe that traditional adult AR therapeutic intervention approaches such as auditory training and speechreading are no longer crucial components of the treatment of hearing loss. What is your opinion?
I believe that a traditional-based AR therapeutic approach is still needed. Some individuals who receive hearing aids feel they do not help as much as desired. Other individuals who are hearing impaired cannot or choose not to utilize amplification because of slight or mild hearing loss or perhaps moderate or severe hearing loss with poor speech recognition. Both groups need help in developing emphasis on visual and auditory cues as well as developing coping mechanisms. As the population ages, these approaches along with the determination of previous communication skills will become necessary.
How do you feel about the recent technological advances that have made services like speechreading and auditory training available for use as home-based interactive self-study?
Home-based interactive services for speechreading and auditory training have a place for those individuals who have transportation and mobility problems. Such programs will need initial interaction with a clinician before the start of the programs. Further, there will be a need for a monitoring source. A continuing problem with any type of treatment program is the lack of an objective measure of significant improvement.
What are your views on the current state of AR and what changes do you foresee in the future?
I feel AR is quite neglected today with the clinical and research emphasis on the characteristics of the hearing aid and the function of the inner ear. In my experience, some recent AuD graduates tend to think in terms of fitting an ear rather than fitting an individual with a hearing loss. Until AR proves to be economically feasible, it will not be recommended often.
Ongoing research is encouraging on the effects of individual speech elements on success in speechreading and aural reception in quiet and noise. Such approaches will give some objectivity to AR.
The increase in the number of cochlear implants reveals the need for audiologic/aural rehabilitation or habilitation as a necessary part of success with some procedures.
Increased attention should be paid to the individual needs and long-term performance of individuals who have received a hearing aid. Training of AuD candidates should include more of an emphasis on the value of and need for AR.
0 Comments
Submit a Comment
Submit A Comment
Name
Comment Title
Comment


This feature is available to Subscribers Only
Sign In or Create an Account ×
FROM THIS ISSUE
June 2007
Volume 12, Issue 8