Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T07:33:42.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential Diagnosis between Apraxia and Dysarthria Based on Acoustic Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Natalia Melle  and
Carlos Gallego
Natalia Melle*
Affiliation:
Universidad Complutense (Spain)
Carlos Gallego
Affiliation:
Universidad Complutense (Spain)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Natalia Melle. Departamento Psicología Básica II. Facultad de Psicología. Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Campus de Somosaguas. 28223 Madrid (Spain). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Acoustic analysis provides objective quantitative measures of speech that enable a comprehensive and accurate understanding of motor disorders and complement the traditional measures. This paper aims to distinguish between normal and pathological speech, more specifically between apraxia of speech and spastic dysarthria in native Spanish speaking patients using acoustic parameters. Participants (4 aphasic with apraxia of speech, 4 with spastic dysarthria, and 15 without speech disorders) performed three different tasks: repeating the syllable sequence [pa-ta-ka], repeating the isolated syllable [pa] and repeating the vowel sequence [i-u]. The results showed that the normative values of motor control, in general, coincide with those obtained in previous research on native English speakers. They also show that damage to motor control processes results in a decrease in the rate of alternating and sequential movements and an increase in the inter-syllabic time for both types of movements. A subset of the acoustic parameters analyzed, those that measure motor planning processes, enable differentiation between normal population and apraxic and dysarthric patients, and between the latter. The differences between the pathological groups support the distinction between motor planning and motor programming as described by van der Merwe's model of sensorimotor processing (1997).

El análisis acústico proporciona medidas cuantitativas objetivas del habla que permiten una comprensión global y más exacta de sus trastornos motores complementando a las medidas tradicionales. En el presente trabajo se realiza un estudio diferencial entre normalidad motora del habla y habla patológica y, dentro de ésta, entre apraxia del habla y disartria espástica basado en parámetros acústicos en pacientes hablantes nativos de español. Los participantes (4 afásicos con apraxia del habla, 4 con disartria espástica y 15 sin patología) realizaron tres tareas: repetir la secuencia silábica [pa-ta-ka], repetir la sílaba aislada [pa] y repetir la secuencia vocálica [i-u]. Los resultados mostraron que los valores normativos de control motor coinciden en general con los obtenidos en investigaciones con hablantes nativos de inglés y que la afectación de los procesos de control motor da lugar a un decremento de la tasa de movimientos alternantes y de movimientos secuenciales así como a un incremento de los tiempos intersilábicos para ambos tipos de movimientos. Un subconjunto de los parámetros acústicos analizados, aquellos que reflejan los procesos de planificación motora, permite diferenciar entre la norma y los pacientes apráxicos y disártricos, y a su vez entre estos. Las diferencias encontradas entre ambos grupos patológicos apoyan la distinción entre planificación motora y programación motora descrita en el modelo de procesamiento sensoriomotor de van der Merwe (1997).

Keywords

acousticapraxiadysarthriamotor controlacústicaapraxiacontrol motordisartria
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , July 2012 , pp. 495 - 504
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackermann, H., Hertric, I., & Hehr, T. (1995). Oral diadochokinesis in neurological dysarthria. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 47, 15–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159%2F000266338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auzou, P., Özsancak, C., Morris, R., Jan, M., Che, F., & Hannequin, D. (2000). Voice onset time in aphasia, apraxia of speech and dysarthria: A review. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 14, 131–150.Google Scholar
Chen, H., & Stevens, K. (2001). An acoustical study of the fricative /s/ in the speech of individuals with dysarthria. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 1300–1314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044%2F1092-4388%282001%2F101%29CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Croot, K. (2002). Diagnosis of apraxia: Definition and criteria. Seminars in Speech and Language, 23, 267–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darley, F. L., Aronson, A. E., & Brown, J. R. (1969a). Clusters of deviant speech dimensions in the dysarthrias. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 12, 462–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darley, F. L., Aronson, A. E., & Brown, J. R. (1969b). Differential diagnostics patterns of dysarthria. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 12, 246–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darley, F. L., Aronson, A. E., & Brown, J. R. (1975). Motor speech disorders. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
Deliyski, D., & Delassuss, C. (1997). Characteristics of motor speech performance: Normative date. Boston, MA: ASHA.Google Scholar
Duffy, J. R. (1995). Motor speech disorders: Substrates, differential diagnosis, and management. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.Google Scholar
Gamboa, J., Jiménez-Jiménez, F. J., Mate, M. A., & Corbeta, I. (2001). Alteraciones de la voz causadas por enfermedades neurológicas [Voice disorders caused by neurological diseases]. Revista de Neurología, 33, 153–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González, J., Cervera, T., & Miralles, J. (2002). Análisis acústico de la voz: Fiabilidad de un conjunto de Parámetros Multidimensionales [Acoustic analysis of the voice: Reliability of a set of multidimensional parameters]. Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española, 53, 256–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodglasss, H., & Kaplan, E. (2005). Evaluación de la afasia y de trastornos relacionados [Assessment of aphasia and related disorders]. Madrid, Spain: Editorial Panamericana.Google Scholar
Kent, R. (1997). The perceptual sensorimotor examination for motor speech disorders. In McNeil, M. R. (Ed.), Clinical management of sensorimotor speech disorders. New York, NY: Thieme.Google Scholar
Kent, R. D., & Kim, Y. J. (2003). Toward an acoustic typology of motor speech disorders. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 17, 427–445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Love, R., Webb, W., & Kirshner, H. (2004). Neurology for the speech-language pathologist. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann-Elsevier.Google Scholar
McNeil, M. R., Robin, D. A., & Schmidt, R. A. (1997). Apraxia of speech: Definition, differentiation and treatment. In McNeil, M. R. (Ed.), Clinical management of sensorimotor speech disorders. New York, NY: Thieme.Google Scholar
Nishio, M, & Niimi, S. (2006). Comparison of speaking rate, articulation rate and alternanting motion rate in dysarthric speakers. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 58, 114–131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000089612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roig-Quillis, M., & Rodríguez-Palmero, A. (2008). Trastornos oromotores en una unidad de neurología pediátrica. Clasificación y evolución clínica [Oral-motor disorders in a pediatric neurology unit. Classification and clinical course]. Revista de Neurología, 47, 509–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, N., Leeper, H. A., Blomgren, M., & Cameron, R. (2001). A description of phonetic, acoustic, and physiological changes associated with improved intelligibility in a speaker with spastic dysarthria. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 10, 274–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2001/025)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schalling, E., & Hartelius, L. (2004). Acoustic analysis of speech tasks performed by three individuals with spinocerebellar staxia. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 56, 367–380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000081084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Merwe, A. (1997). A theorical famework for the characterization of pathological speech sensorimotor control. In McNeil, M. R. (Ed.), Clinical management of sensorimotor speech disorders. New York, NY: Thieme.Google Scholar
Wang, V. T., Kent, R. D., Duffy, J. R., Thomas, J. E., & Weismer, G. (2004). Alternanting motion rate as an index of speech motor disorders en traumatic brain injury. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 18, 57–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699200310001596160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weismer, G., & Martin, R. (1992). Acoustic and perceptual approaches to the study of intelligibility. In Kent, R. D. (Ed.), Intelligibility in speech disorders. Amsterdam, PA: J. Benjamins Pub.Google Scholar
Ziegler, W., & Von Cramon, D. (1986a). Spastic dysarthria after acquired brain injury: An acoustic study. The British Journal of Disorders of Communication, 21, 173–187. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/13682828609012275CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziegler, W., & Von Cramon, D. (1986b). Disturbed coarticulation in apraxia of speech: Acoustic evidence. Brain and Language, 29, 34–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0093-934X(86)90032-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed