Search

Background: Speech disorders in children with a cleft palate with or without a cleft lip (CP±L) are complex given the magnitude of influencing factors. Providing intervention to eliminate these speech errors is often challenging. Speech–language pathologists (SLPs) might have negative perceptions of the treatment of children with a CP±L. Aims: To explore how community SLPs perceive and experience the provision of speech intervention to children with a CP±L. Methods & Procedures: A total of 18 female community SLPs, aged between 23 and 62 years, were included in this study. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted. The interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic approach aiming to identify themes driven by the data. Trustworthiness of the data was achieved by including researcher triangulation (involving three researchers with different research backgrounds) and deviant case analysis of two cases. Outcomes & Results: Initial responses demonstrated that the community SLPs were excited and enthusiastic to treat children with a CP±L. Expanding on these initial reports, however, they revealed that their excitement turned into professional self‐doubt and insecurity when confronted with the treatment challenges inherent with this population. To cope with this self‐doubt, they outlined several responsibilities for the cleft team SLPs. They expressed a strong desire to receive confirmation and approval on their treatment practices from more experienced SLPs (i.e., the cleft team SLPs). Their perceptions were dominated by a polarized thinking pattern. Treatment approaches were divided in categories as 'right' or 'wrong' and 'good' or 'bad'. Conclusions & Implications: The community SLPs are lacking professional confidence when treating children with a CP±L. They put themselves in a subordinate position towards the cleft team SLPs and expect the latter to provide ready‐made answers to problems and questions. This expectation can perhaps be explained by their fear of making mistakes during therapy preventing treatment progress. If they handle in accordance with the experts' advice, they cannot blame themselves in cases where no treatment progress is seen. Educational programmes need to pay more attention to gaining professional confidence (in the search for the most optimal treatment approach for each individual patient) rather than merely focusing on competency‐based learning tools. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Speech disorders in children with a cleft palate with or without a cleft lip (CP±L) are complex given the magnitude of influencing factors. Providing intervention to eliminate these speech errors is often challenging. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study explored how community SLPs' perceive and experience the provision of speech intervention to children with a CP±L. The perceptions of community SLPs are dominated by a polarized thinking pattern. Treatment approaches are divided into categories as "right" or "wrong" and "good" or "bad". They lack professional confidence when they treat children with a CP±L. The community SLPs put themselves in a subordinate position towards the cleft team SLPs and expect the latter to provide ready‐made answers to problems and questions. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Educational programs in speech‐language pathology need to pay more attention to gaining professional confidence rather than merely focusing on competency‐based learning tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]