Search

Background: Impaired discourse production is commonly reported for individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Discourse deficits can negatively impact community integration, return to employment and quality of life. COVID‐19 restrictions have reduced in‐person assessment services for people with communication impairments. Advances in telehealth may help speech and language therapists (SLTs) to assess monologic discourse more systematically and improve access to services for patients who may find it difficult to attend in‐person. Aims: To examine the feasibility of telehealth administration of narrative and procedural discourse tasks with individuals with TBI and matched controls. Methods & Procedures: A total of 20 individuals with TBI and 20 healthy controls, aged 18–55 years, were directly recruited from the UK and indirectly recruited from the US. For participants with TBI, time post‐injury was at least 3 months with no diagnosis of aphasia. Control participants were matched for sex and as closely as possible for age. Feasibility of measures was based upon the time to administer both narrative tasks, the report of any technological problems, and participant feed. Discourse samples were transcribed verbatim and analysed using story grammar analysis (for narrative discourse) and identification of propositions (for procedural discourse). Interrater reliability was calculated using percentage agreement for 50% of the data. Non‐parametric analyses were used to analyse the performance of the two groups. Outcomes & Results: Narrative and procedural discourse samples were collected via telehealth in approximately 10 min with no reported technical difficulties or complaints from any participants. For narrative discourse performance, there were significant differences for the TBI and control groups for measures of complete episodes (p < 0.001) and missing episodes (p = 0.005). No significant group differences were noted for any of the procedural discourse measures. Conclusions & Implications: Results support the feasibility of collecting discourse samples via telehealth. Although the participants' discourse performance distinguished the TBI and control groups on the narrative task, no differences between the groups were noted for the procedural task. The narrative discourse task may have been more difficult than the procedural task, or video cue support reduced the cognitive load of the procedural task. This finding suggests the use of more complex procedural tasks without video cue support may be needed. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Although little research has explored the feasibility of administering discourse assessments for individuals with TBI via telehealth, some studies have found that discourse interventions can be feasibly administered via telehealth. It is also well established that individuals with TBI struggle with the supra‐structural and macro‐linguistic elements of discourse production. Both procedural and narrative discourse tasks have been found to differentiate individuals with TBI from healthy controls. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Few studies have investigated the feasibility of, and procedures for, administering discourse tasks via telehealth. Additionally, the inclusion of multiple types of discourse tasks to parse cognitive–communication abilities is lacking in the current literature. Findings from this study support that narrative and procedural discourse can be feasibly sampled via telehealth and that international collaboration for research on this topic can facilitate such studies. Individuals with TBI performed more poorly on three measures of narrative discourse. No differences between groups were identified for the procedural task. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Telehealth assessment for discourse provides flexibility for both the individual with TBI and the speech–language therapist and does not compromise the quality of data collected. The administration of discourse tasks and collection of data was not time‐consuming and was well accepted by the study participants. Additionally, international research collaboration not only expands potential participation in research but increases the opportunity to recruit and study more diverse groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech and language therapy (SLT) education must meet the needs of the future workforce, training enough students who are competent practitioners able to meet the workforce demands. Increasing student numbers and the impact on placement providers mean students must be equipped for learning on placement. Simulation is a way of supporting students to develop their clinical skills and decision‐making in a safe, supportive environment. Aims: To explore the perspectives of SLT students who were introduced to simulation during their undergraduate degree at a UK university as part of a pilot study. The aim of the pilot was to listen to the students' voices to begin to understand their lived experiences of simulation and to gather views on how simulation can support their clinical learning. Methods & Procedures: Focus groups and semi‐structured interviews were carried out with second‐year BSc SLT students in semester 2 following the simulated learning activities and clinical placement. Qualitative data were gathered and thematic analysis was applied to the data to identify the barriers and enablers to students' clinical learning in simulation. Outcomes & Results: A total of 11 students responded out of a cohort of 38. Three key themes were identified from the analysis: individual learning needs, facilitator skill and programme‐level organization. Conclusions & Implications: Student experience of simulation was positive. One of the key elements students found to support their clinical skills was the importance of the safe space; support for learning instead of correction led them to engage in active learning. Key barriers to simulation related to having sufficient prior knowledge, the skills of the facilitator, group size and the wider learning landscape of the programme. In response to this pilot, there are plans to continue developing this model of simulation and embed simulation across the programme, led by a sound pedagogical approach with clear preparation and planning and building the necessary infrastructure. Other SLT programmes and practice educators developing simulation as part of their programmes or placement may wish to consider some of these findings to support the use of simulation in their workplace. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Simulation as a teaching methodology is widely used in medicine and nursing programmes. It is now used in various allied health professions and in some SLT programmes. There is evidence to suggest simulation increases student confidence and clinical skills without increasing the capacity on those offering clinical placements in practice. What is already known on this subject: This study offers a practical example of introducing simulation in an established undergraduate programme for SLT students. It explains the background to this innovative way of teaching clinical skills and explains why this approach could be beneficial for the future speech and language therapist. What are the clinical implications of this work?: This study gives practical examples of how simulation can work to facilitate student clinical learning and knowledge. It may offer ideas to those working in clinical practice to organize placements differently or add simulation elements to improve the student experience. Other educational establishments and placement educators may find the recommendations helpful in developing their own simulation approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Moral thinking and communication are critical competencies for confronting social dilemmas in a challenging world. We examined these moral competencies in 70 college students and graduates from Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Participants were assessed through semi-structured written interviews, Facebook group discussions, and a questionnaire. In this paper, we describe the similarities and differences across cultural groupings in (1) the social issues of greatest importance to the participants; (2) the factors influencing their approaches to thinking about social issues and communicating with others; and (3) the characteristics of their moral functioning in terms of moral awareness, moral judgment, moral discourse, and moral decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is limited provision of inpatient detoxification relative to other treatments for alcohol and other drug (AOD) use. This means people often need to wait prior to detoxifying. However, waiting for healthcare is generally perceived as negative and stressful. This paper aims to understand patients' experiences of waiting for inpatient AOD detoxification to ascertain whether and how service-level policies and practices might be improved. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 32 people (20 males, 12 females; aged 25–67 years) who were waiting for inpatient detoxification. Data collection was part of a wider evaluation of a policy initiative started in 2021 to increase detoxification service capacity in England, UK. Interviews were professionally transcribed and data on waiting experiences were coded using qualitative software. Analyses were informed by new materialist thinking and undertaken via Iterative Categorisation. We found that waiting was constituted through five dimensions: i. duration; ii. support; iii. information; iv. preparations; and v. emotions. These five dimensions were multi-faceted and operated in and through wider interacting social, material, and affective forces (e.g., professional judgements, formal and informal relationships, the availability of beds and funding, bureaucratic procedures, the utility and relevance of information, and participants' diverse feelings, including desperation for treatment). Not all accounts of waiting were negative. The experience was complex, non-uniform and variable over time. Moreover, it affected how people felt and how they behaved. Changes to service-level policies and practices can potentially minimise the stress of waiting for inpatient AOD detoxification. The negative impact of waiting may be reduced if professionals more consistently engage patients in a wider range of constructive pre-treatment activities, offer regular 'check-ins' to mitigate any anxiety, explain changes in wait duration to help with planning and demonstrate fairness, and facilitate contact between those waiting to lessen feelings of isolation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]