Search

Background: Indirect speech and language therapy, such as parent‐implemented intervention, has been shown to be an effective approach for young children with speech and language disorders. However, relatively few studies have compared outcomes of parent‐directed therapy with child‐directed intervention, that is, individual therapy of a child delivered by a speech and language therapist (SLT). Although speech and language therapists (SLTs) regard parental engagement as imperative for successful intervention, currently they predominantly use child‐directed intervention. Aim: To evaluate the effect of parent‐ versus child‐directed speech–language therapy embedded in usual care intervention for young children with developmental language disorder (DLD). Methods & Procedures: In a randomized trial, forty‐six 3‐year‐old monolingual children with DLD were assigned to parent‐directed intervention or child‐directed intervention groups. In addition, all children received usual care in special‐language daycare centres. Outcomes included children's language development and functional communication, parents' language output, parents' perceptions and their self‐efficacy. These were assessed at three time intervals, that is, at baseline, immediately after 6 months of treatment, and 1 year after baseline. The parent‐directed intervention consisted of twelve 50‐min sessions every 2 weeks with parent and child, consisting of parental training with immediate feedback by (SLTs. Children in the child‐directed intervention group received individual speech–language therapy in weekly 30‐min sessions for 6 months. Outcomes & Results: Intervention in both groups was equally effective. All children improved significantly in receptive and expressive language measures as well as in functional communication at all intervals. All parents used significantly more language support strategies and were less concerned about their child's participation in communication. Parents in the parent‐directed intervention group reported increased self‐efficacy in stimulating their child's language development. In contrast, parents in the child‐directed intervention group reported a decrease in self‐efficacy. Though modest, these group differences were significant in both the short and long terms. Both parents and SLTs were positive about the parent‐directed intervention. Conclusions & Implications: The effects of parent‐ and child‐directed intervention for young children with DLD are similar. The parent‐directed intervention adds to treatment options for parents as well as for SLTs and creates choices for shared decision‐making. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Language therapy for young children with DLD comprises various delivery models. Two of these are child‐ and parent‐directed therapy by SLTs. Compared with no treatment, both delivery models are effective, but it is unclear if one of these results in better language outcomes than the other. SLTs value child‐directed intervention more highly than indirect approaches where treatment is delivered by others. This study aims to compare the relative effectiveness of parent‐directed intervention with child‐directed intervention, both parts of multi‐component usual care intervention. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This randomized trial indicates that a parent‐directed intervention model is as effective as child‐directed intervention by SLTs for children's language development and functional communication. Parents' use of language support strategies was also similar in both intervention models, in the short and long terms. Like in child‐directed therapy, parent‐directed intervention reduces parents' concerns. Contrary to child‐directed treatment, parent‐directed intervention increases parents' self‐efficacy, that is, supporting their child's language development. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Though SLTs predominantly choose a child‐directed intervention model, the study results show that they can consider parent‐directed approaches too. There are no significant differences in children's language outcomes as a function of parent‐ or child‐directed intervention. Furthermore, parents and SLTs were positive about the parent‐directed intervention program and the SLTs evaluated it as valuable and feasible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Compensatory cleft speech disorders can severely impact speech understandability and speech acceptability. Speech intervention is necessary to eliminate these disorders. There is, however, currently no consensus on the most effective speech therapy approach to eliminate the different subtypes of compensatory cleft speech disorders. Aims: To compare the immediate, short‐ and long‐term effects of three well‐defined speech intervention approaches (i.e., a motor–phonetic approach, a linguistic–phonological approach and a combined phonetic–phonological approach) on the speech and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) in Belgian Dutch‐speaking children with cleft palate with or without cleft lip (CP±L) and different subtypes of compensatory speech disorders (i.e., anterior oral cleft speech characteristics (CSCs), posterior oral CSCs or non‐oral CSCs). Besides, the perceived acceptability of these three speech intervention approaches will be investigated from the perspectives of caregivers and children with a CP±L. Methods & Procedures: A two‐centre longitudinal randomized sham‐controlled trial was used. Children were randomly assigned to one of the three intervention programmes and received 10 h of speech intervention divided over 2 weeks. Block randomization was used, stratified by age and gender. Primary outcome measures included perceptual speech outcomes. Secondary outcome measures included patient‐reported outcomes. Outcomes & Results: The results of this trial will provide speech–language pathologists evidence‐based guidelines to better tailor intervention approaches to the specific needs of a child with a defined compensatory speech disorder. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Speech therapy approaches to address cleft palate speech disorders are broadly divided into two categories: motor–phonetic interventions and linguistic–phonological interventions. Some limited evidence demonstrated the positive effects of these approaches in eliminating compensatory cleft speech disorders. Different studies have reported inter‐individual variation, suggesting that one child may benefit more from a particular intervention approach than the other child. Perhaps this variation can be attributed to the specific subtype of compensatory speech disorder (i.e., anterior oral CSC, posterior oral CSC or non‐oral CSC). What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This paper describes a randomized sham‐controlled trial that compared the immediate, short‐ and long‐term effects of three well‐defined speech intervention approaches (i.e., a motor–phonetic approach, a linguistic–phonological approach and a combined phonetic–phonological approach) on the speech and HRQoL in Belgian Dutch‐speaking children with CP±L and different subtypes of compensatory cleft speech disorders (i.e., anterior oral CSCs, posterior oral CSCs or non‐oral CSCs) measured by perceptual and psychosocial outcome measures. Besides, the experienced acceptability of these three speech intervention approaches were investigated from the perspectives of caregivers and children. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This project provides evidence‐based knowledge on patient‐tailored cleft speech intervention considering both scientific evidence and the perspectives of caregivers and children. The results aid SLPs in better tailoring intervention approaches to the needs of a child with a specific type of compensatory cleft speech disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A promising way to obtain vocal economy and efficiency is by semi‐occluding the vocal tract while phonating. Current knowledge about the immediate effects of semi‐occluded vocal tract (SOVT) phonation on the laryngeal function and configuration is based mainly on computer modelling or excised larynges studies. In in vivo SOVT studies, electroglottography (EGG) has been the most commonly used laryngeal outcome, showing contradictory results between studies. Therefore, exploring these aspects by direct visualisation of the human larynx during SOVT phonation using strobovideolaryngoscopy (SVL) is needed. Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the immediate effects of straw phonation (SP) in air, SP in 2 cm water, and SP in 5 cm water (with stirring straws), on the laryngeal function and configuration of a homogeneous group of vocally healthy female speech‐language pathology students, visualised with flexible SVL. Methods & Procedure: A randomised controlled trial was used. Fifty‐two female speech‐language pathology students (mean age: 18.7 years, SD: 0.6) were assigned randomly to one of three experimental groups or a control group: (1) SP in air, (2) SP in 2 cm water, (3) SP in 5 cm water or (4) [u] phonation with similar soft onset and slightly pursed lips as in SP but without a straw (control group). The participants underwent flexible SVL during habitual [u] phonation, followed by the specific SOVT exercise of their group assignment. All video samples were evaluated randomly and blindly by two experienced investigators using the Voice‐Vibratory Assessment with Laryngeal Imaging (VALI) rating form, first independently and then by consensus. Outcome & Results: Compared to habitual phonation, the vibrational amplitude decreased during SP in 5 cm water and SP in 2 cm water, being more prominent in the first, more flow‐resistant exercise. The mucosal wave also decreased during SP in 5 cm water. The anteroposterior (AP) supraglottic compression similarly increased during SP in air, SP in 2 cm water, and SP in 5 cm water. Further, a rise in mediolateral (ML) compression and a decrease in phase symmetry and regularity were found during SP in 2 cm water. A similar decrease in regularity was observed during SP in 5 cm water. Conclusions & Implications: Both SP in air and SP in water cause positive immediate laryngeal effects for voice training opportunities. More AP supraglottic activity found during each SP exercise might indicate epilarynx narrowing, an economic phenomenon associated with SOVT. Immersing the straw in water additionally diminished the vibrational amplitude, lowering vocal fold impact stress and risk for phonotrauma during the exercise. The decreased regularity of the vibrational cycles during SP in water might be due to the varying back pressure created by the water bubbling. The impact of SP in water on ML supraglottic compression needs further investigation. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: A promising way to obtain vocal economy and efficiency is by semi‐occluding the vocal tract while phonating. Current knowledge about the immediate effects of semi‐occluded vocal tract (SOVT) phonation on the laryngeal function and configuration is based mainly on computer modelling or excised larynges studies. In in vivo SOVT studies, electroglottography (EGG) has been the most commonly used laryngeal outcome, showing contradictory results between studies. Therefore, exploring these aspects by direct visualisation of the human larynx during SOVT phonation using strobovideolaryngoscopy (SVL) is needed. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Group results of the current study generally support earlier computer modelling and in vivo studies, strengthening the current SOVT knowledge. Both SP in air and SP in water cause positive immediate laryngeal effects for voice training opportunities. More anteroposterior (AP) supraglottic activity found during each SP exercise might indicate epilarynx narrowing, an economic phenomenon associated with SOVT. Immersing the straw in water additionally diminished the vibrational amplitude, lowering vocal fold impact stress and risk for phonotrauma during the exercise. The decreased regularity of the vibrational cycles during SP in water might be due to the varying back pressure created by the water bubbling. The impact of SP in water on ML supraglottic compression needs further investigation. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Current results support that both SP in air and SP in water can be useful exercises in voice training. SP in water has shown the additional gain of lowering the vibrational amplitude during the exercise, hence supporting its appropriateness for vocal warm‐ups by minimising vocal fold impact stress and the risk of phonotrauma. In the future, large‐scale randomised controlled trials in other subgroups of voice users, including dysphonic patients, are needed to support evidence‐based practice. SVL can facilitate the search for individualised training and therapy approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Continued professional development (CPD) is required for updated skills and knowledge. This study evaluates the efficacy of a CPD programme for mainstream school teachers. Aims: In an 11‐week intervention programme, speech–language therapists (SLTs) presented the participating teachers with whole‐class teaching techniques aimed at creating a language and communication‐supporting classroom environment. The effects of the intervention on the language development of the students in the teachers' classes were assessed. Methods & Procedures: A total of 211 first‐ and second‐year students (Mage = 7;6, range = 6;5–8;9) underwent standardized language assessments of receptive and expressive language abilities before and after their teachers' participation in the CPD. The students were divided into intervention and delayed intervention groups to enable randomized intervention allocation. Linear mixed modelling was used to estimate the individual and interaction effects of group, time and demographic factors. Outcomes & Results: Significant effects of time, group and school, respectively, but no interaction between time and group indicates that while all students advanced between assessments, the progress was not attributable to the teachers' participation in the CPD. Conclusions & Implications: Results are discussed in light of those of recent studies of universal services to support optimal language development. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Although inconclusive, previous research indicates that intervention delivered to teachers by SLTs has the potential to improve the language abilities of the students in the teachers' classrooms. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study explored the language development of first‐ and second‐year mainstream school students whose teachers took part in a CPD programme aimed at establishing language and communication‐supporting teaching techniques. Results indicate that the development of the students' language abilities could not be attributed to the teachers' participation in the CPD. What are the potential or actual implications of the work?: SLTs are often asked to guide teachers and teaching staff rather than themselves conduct individual assessments and interventions. The results of this trial can be used to inform the discussion on how to prioritize between tasks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Very young children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds often show poorer language development. Whilst there have been attempts to provide early intervention programmes, these sometimes miss the most disadvantaged groups. Aims: This report presents preliminary feasibility and effectiveness data for a novel language intervention designed for parents of toddlers in the United Kingdom. Methods and Procedures: In total, 43 UK families of 2–4‐year‐olds were recruited to the study, half of whom completed an 8‐week course (Tots Talking) focussed on parent interaction, and half of whom acted as wait‐list controls. Results and Outcomes: Results suggest that such programmes are feasible for families with 86% staying in the intervention. In addition, greater changes in underlying communication skills such as joint attention and gesture were evident compared to wait‐list controls. Conclusions and Implications: We conclude that pre‐verbal skills may be more important to measure as initial outcomes than language or vocabulary change in this population. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds are at higher risk of communication difficulties and there is a need for community intervention programmes for very young children. What this study adds: This study suggests that such programmes can be feasible and effective, but that very early/basic communicative skills (such as joint attention) may be boosted first rather than language or vocabulary. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Children's centres and other community services could feasibly run short parent facing courses emphasising contingent communication in low SES families and other diverse groups. These may be more successful run with younger preschoolers. Joint attention may be a better focus of intervention before expecting vocabulary or language change. Community health professionals may find this information useful in referring and supporting families in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Narrative discourse is central to effective participation in conversations. When discourse is assessed in people with communication disability, structured tasks (e.g., picture descriptions) provide experimental control, while unstructured tasks (e.g., personal narratives) represent more natural communication. Immersive virtual reality (VR) technology may provide a solution by creating standardized experiences for narrative retell, therefore balancing ecological validity and experimental control in discourse assessment. Research is needed to understand how VR immersion affects narrative retell, first for adults with no communication disability, before application with adults with aphasia or related communication disability. Aims: To assess (1) the effects of VR immersion on the linguistic content and structure of narrative retells in a healthy adult population; and (2) whether VR immersion can influence the way a narrative is retold so that the speaker conveys their own experience, rather than the experience of the characters they are watching. Methods & Procedures: In this pilot cohort study, 13 healthy adult participants with no reported communication disability watched an animated short film and a comparable immersive VR short film in a randomized order. Participants were asked to retell the events of the story after each condition in as much detail as possible. Outcomes & Results: Mean length of utterance (in morphemes) was significantly higher in the video condition compared with the VR condition. Significantly more first‐person pronouns were used in the VR condition compared with the video condition. No other measures of linguistic content or structure were significantly different between the VR and video conditions. Conclusions & Implications: Increased morpho‐syntactic length and complexity in the video condition may suggest effects of elicitation stimulus on the narrative produced. The larger number of first‐person pronouns in the VR condition may reflect that participants experienced a sense of presence in the virtual environment, and therefore were able to retell their communication experience rather than narrating the experiences of characters from an external perspective. Given the increasing need for more functional assessment of discourse in people with communication disability, further research is needed to validate these findings. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: As an ecologically valid tool, discourse analysis is often used to assess daily communicative exchanges in adults with acquired communication disability. Clinicians and researchers using narrative discourse assessment must balance the experimental control and diagnostic reference sample capabilities of structured tasks with the ecological validity and real‐life transferability of unstructured personal narratives. What this study adds to existing knowledge: This study explores the use of immersive VR technologies to create standardized, replicable, immersive experiences as a foundation for narrative discourse assessment. It highlights how the 'sense of presence' in a virtual world can prompt healthy adult speakers to retell a narrative of a personal experience that can be replicated for many different participants. The results suggest that immersive VR narrative assessment for adults with communication disability may balance ecological validity with measurement reliability in discourse assessment. What are the potential or actual clinical observations of this work?: Immersion in VR resulted in the production of narratives with morpho‐syntactic features that aligned with typical narrative generation, rather than retell. Participants used more first‐person pronouns, suggesting retelling of personal experience. Though further study is needed, these preliminary findings suggest clinicians can use immersive VR stimuli to generate structured story generations that balance experimental and diagnostic control with ecological validity in narrative discourse assessment for adults with communication disability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Perceptual, cognitive and previous clinical experience may influence a novice Videofluoroscopic Swallowing Study (VFSS) analyst's trajectory towards competency. Understanding these factors may allow trainees to be better prepared for VFSS training and may allow training to be developed to accommodate differences between trainees. Aims: This study explored a range of factors previously suggested in the literature as influencing the development of novice analysts' VFSS skills. We hypothesised that knowledge of swallow anatomy and physiology, visual perceptual skills, self‐efficacy and interest, and prior clinical exposure would all influence VFSS novice analysts' skill development. Methods & Procedures: Participants were undergraduate speech pathology students recruited from an Australian university, who had completed the required theoretical units in dysphagia. Data assessing the factors of interest were collected—the participants identified anatomical structures on a still radiographic image, completed a physiology questionnaire, completed subsections of the Developmental Test of Visual Processing—Adults, self‐reported the number of dysphagia cases they managed on placement, and self‐rated their confidence and interest. Data for 64 participants relating to the factors of interest were compared with their ability to accurately identify swallowing impairments following 15 h of VFSS analytical training, using correlation and regression analysis. Outcomes & Results: Success in VFSS analytical training was best predicted by clinical exposure to dysphagia cases and the ability to identify anatomical landmarks on still radiographic images. Conclusions & Implications: Novice analysts vary in the acquisition of beginner‐level VFSS analytical skill. Our findings suggest that speech pathologists who are new to VFSS may benefit from clinical exposure to dysphagia cases, sound foundational knowledge of anatomy relevant to swallowing and the ability to see the anatomical landmarks on still radiographic images. Further research is required to equip VFSS trainers and trainees for training, to understand differences between learners during skill development. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: The existing literature suggests that no vice Video fluoroscopic Swallowing Study (VFSS) analysts training may be influenced by their personal characteristics and experience. What this study adds: This study found that student clinicians, clinical exposure to dysphagia cases and their ability to identify anatomical landmarks relevant to swallowing on still radiographic images prior to training best predicted their ability to identify swallowing impairments after training. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Given the expense of training health professionals, further research is required into the factors that successfully prepare clinicians for VFSS training, including clinical exposure, foundational knowledge of anatomy relevant to swallowing and the ability to identify the anatomical landmarks on still radiographic images. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The language of the science curriculum is complex, even in the early grades. To communicate their scientific observations, children must produce complex syntax, particularly complement clauses (e.g., I think it will float; We noticed that it vibrates). Complex syntax is often challenging for children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and thus their learning and communication of science may be compromised. Aims: We asked whether recast therapy delivered in the context of a science curriculum led to gains in complement clause use and scientific content knowledge. To understand the efficacy of recast therapy, we compared changes in science and language knowledge in children who received treatment for complement clauses embedded in a first‐grade science curriculum to two active control conditions (vocabulary + science, phonological awareness + science). Methods & Procedures: This 2‐year single‐site three‐arm parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted in Delaware, USA. Children with DLD, not yet in first grade and with low accuracy on complement clauses, were eligible. Thirty‐three 4–7‐year‐old children participated in the summers of 2018 and 2019 (2020 was cancelled due to COVID‐19). We assigned participants to arms using 1:1:1 pseudo‐random allocation (avoiding placing siblings together). The intervention consisted of 39 small‐group sessions of recast therapy, robust vocabulary instruction or phonological awareness intervention during eight science units over 4 weeks, followed by two science units (1 week) taught without language intervention. Pre‐/post‐measures were collected 3 weeks before and after camp by unmasked assessors. Outcomes & Results: Primary outcome measures were accuracy on a 20‐item probe of complement clause production and performance on ten 10‐item unit tests (eight science + language, two science only). Complete data were available for 31 children (10 grammar, 21 active control); two others were lost to follow‐up. Both groups made similar gains on science unit tests for science + language content (pre versus post, d = 2.9, p < 0.0001; group, p = 0.24). The grammar group performed significantly better at post‐test than the active control group (d = 2.5, p = 0.049) on complement clause probes and marginally better on science‐only unit tests (d = 2.5, p = 0.051). Conclusions & Implications: Children with DLD can benefit from language intervention embedded in curricular content and learn both language and science targets taught simultaneously. Tentative findings suggest that treatment for grammar targets may improve academic outcomes. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: We know that recast therapy focused on morphology is effective but very time consuming. Treatment for complex syntax in young children has preliminary efficacy data available. Prior research provides mixed evidence as to children's ability to learn language targets in conjunction with other information. What this study adds: This study provides additional data supporting the efficacy of intensive complex syntax recast therapy for children ages 4–7 with Developmental Language Disorder. It also provides data that children can learn language targets and science curricular content simultaneously. What are the clinical implications of this work?: As SLPs, we have to talk about something to deliver language therapy; we should consider talking about curricular content. Recast therapy focused on syntactic frames is effective with young children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aim: To assess consonant proficiency and velopharyngeal function in 10‐year‐old children born with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) within the Scandcleft project. Methods & Procedures: Three parallel group, randomized, clinical trials were undertaken as an international multicentre study by nine cleft teams in five countries. Three different surgical protocols for primary palate repair (Arm B–Lip and soft palate closure at 3–4 months, hard palate closure at 36 months, Arm C–Lip closure at 3–4 months, hard and soft palate closure at 12 months, and Arm D–Lip closure at 3–4 months combined with a single‐layer closure of the hard palate using a vomer flap, soft palate closure at 12 months) were tested against a common procedure (Arm A–Lip and soft palate closure at 3–4 months followed by hard palate closure at 12 months) in the total cohort of 431 children born with a non‐syndromic UCLP. Speech audio and video recordings of 399 children were available and perceptually analysed. Percentage of consonants correct (PCC) from a naming test, an overall rating of velopharyngeal competence (VPC) (VPC‐Rate), and a composite measure (VPC‐Sum) were reported. Outcomes & Results: The mean levels of consonant proficiency (PCC score) in the trial arms were 86–92% and between 58% and 83% of the children had VPC (VPC‐Sum). Only 50–73% of the participants had a consonant proficiency level with their peers. Girls performed better throughout. Long delay of the hard palate repair (Arm B) indicated lower PCC and simultaneous hard and soft palate closure higher (Arm C). However, the proportion of participants with primary VPC (not including velopharyngeal surgeries) was highest in Arm B (68%) and lowest in Arm C (47%). Conclusions & Implications: The speech outcome in terms of PCC and VPC was low across the trials. The different protocols had their pros and cons and there is no obvious evidence to recommend any of the protocols as superior. Aspects other than primary surgical method, such as time after velopharyngeal surgery, surgical experience, hearing level, language difficulties and speech therapy, need to be thoroughly reviewed for a better understanding of what has affected speech outcome at 10 years. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Speech outcomes at 10 years of age in children treated for UCLP are sparse and contradictory. Previous studies have examined speech outcomes and the relationship with surgical intervention in 5‐year‐olds. What this study adds to the existing knowledge: Speech outcomes based on standardized assessment in a large group of 10‐year‐old children born with UCLP and surgically treated according to different protocols are presented. While speech therapy had been provided, a large proportion of the children across treatment protocols still needed further speech therapy. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Aspects other than surgery and speech function might add to the understanding of what affects speech outcome. Effective speech therapy should be available for children in addition to primary surgical repair of the cleft and secondary surgeries if needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Successful communication is vital to quality of life. One group commonly facing speech and communication difficulties is individuals with intellectual disability (ID). A novel route to encourage clear speech is offered by mainstream smart speakers (e.g., Amazon Alexa and Google Home). Smart speakers offer four factors important for learning: reward immediacy, spaced practice, autonomy/intrinsic motivation and reduced social barriers. Yet the potential of smart speakers to improve speech intelligibility has not been explored before. Aims: To determine whether providing individuals with intellectual disabilities with smart speaker devices improved ratings of speech intelligibility for (1) phrases related to device use and (2) unrelated words via a semi‐randomized controlled trial. Methods & Procedures: In a semi‐randomized controlled trial, an intervention group of adults with ID (N = 21) received smart speakers, while a control group (N = 22) did not. Before and after about 12 weeks, participants were recorded saying smart speaker‐related phrases and unrelated words. Naïve participants then rated the intelligibility of the speech recordings. Outcomes & Results: The group that received smart speakers made significantly larger intelligibility gains than the control group. Although the effect size was modest, this difference was found for both smart speaker‐related phrases and unrelated words. Conclusions & Implications: While the mechanism of action remains to be determined, the presence of smart speakers in the home had a demonstrable impact on ratings of speech intelligibility, and could provide cost‐effective inclusive support for speech and communication improvement, improving the quality of life of vulnerable populations. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectSpeech intelligibility is a key obstacle for social relationships and quality of life across several vulnerable populations (children with speech difficulties, older adults with dementia, individuals with ID). Anecdotal reports suggest mainstream smart speakers (e.g., Amazon Alexa, Google Home), could improve speech intelligibility.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeWe used a semi‐randomized controlled trial to show that using a smart speaker for about 12 weeks could improve ratings of speech intelligibility in adults with ID for both smart speaker‐related phrases and unrelated words.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?These initial findings suggest that smart speaker technology could be a novel, and inclusive, route to improving speech intelligibility in vulnerable populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The articulatory accuracy of patients with dysarthria is one of the most affected speech dimensions with a high impact on speech intelligibility. Behavioural treatments of articulation can either involve direct or indirect approaches. The latter have been thoroughly investigated and are generally appreciated for their almost immediate effects on articulation and intelligibility. The number of studies on (short‐term) direct articulation therapy is limited. Aims: To investigate the effects of short‐term, boost articulation therapy (BArT) on speech intelligibility in patients with chronic or progressive dysarthria and the effect of severity of dysarthria on the outcome. Methods & Procedures: The study consists of a two‐group pre‐/post‐test design to assess speech intelligibility at phoneme and sentence level and during spontaneous speech, automatic speech and reading a phonetically balanced text. A total of 17 subjects with mild to severe dysarthria participated in the study and were randomly assigned to either a patient‐tailored, intensive articulatory drill programme or an intensive minimal pair training. Both training programmes were based on the principles of motor learning. Each training programme consisted of five sessions of 45 min completed within one week. Outcomes & Results: Following treatment, a statistically significant increase of mean group intelligibility was shown at phoneme and sentence level, and in automatic sequences. This was supported by an acoustic analysis that revealed a reduction in formant centralization ratio. Within specific groups of severity, large and moderate positive effect sizes with Cohen's d were demonstrated. Conclusions & Implications: BArT successfully improves speech intelligibility in patients with chronic or progressive dysarthria at different levels of the impairment. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectBehavioural treatment of articulation in patients with dysarthria mainly involves indirect strategies, which have shown positive effects on speech intelligibility. However, there is limited evidence on the short‐term effects of direct articulation therapy at the segmental level of speech. This study investigates the effectiveness of BArT on speech intelligibility in patients with chronic or progressive dysarthria at all severity levels.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThe intensive and direct articulatory therapy programmes developed and applied in this study intend to reduce the impairment instead of compensating it. This approach results in a significant improvement of speech intelligibility at different dysarthria severity levels in a short period of time while contributing to exploit and develop all available residual motor skills in persons with dysarthria.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?The improvements in intelligibility demonstrate the effectiveness of a BArT at the segmental level of speech. This makes it to be considered a suitable approach in the treatment of patients with chronic or progressive dysarthria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children who experience adversity are more vulnerable to language difficulties. Early interventions beginning antenatally, such as home visiting, are provided to help prevent these problems. To improve the precision of early interventions, the impact of combinations of risk and protective factors over time must be explored and understood. There is, however, limited research investigating how such factors interact with intervention to change language outcomes over time. Aim: To explore the different paths that lead to Good and Poor language in a cohort of children experiencing adversity whose mothers received an optimal dose of the Maternal Early Childhood Sustained Home visiting (MECSH) intervention over 2.5 years. Methods & Procedures: A total of 24 low socioeconomic status (SES) mothers experiencing adversity and their children who received more than half the scheduled dose of the MECSH intervention were followed over time: from before birth to school entry. Data were extracted from surveys and direct measurement over the study course. Child language outcome at school entry and the influence of seven key child, maternal and environmental factors, which have been shown in previous research to result in Good and Poor language outcomes, were explored through qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). QCA is a qualitative analytical technique that provides a deeper understanding of factor combinations influencing language development. Outcomes & Results: Multiple paths to Good (six paths) and Poor language (seven paths) were found. Paths with mostly protective factors resulted in Good language, except when maternal antenatal distress was present. Paths with two or more influential risks usually resulted in Poor language outcomes. When children experiencing adversity received the MECSH home visiting intervention, there was no one risk or protective factor necessary for Good or Poor language outcomes; however, there were clear patterns of factor combinations. Conclusions & Implications: Mothers' antenatal psychological resources were a flag for future language concerns which can be used to improve the precision of the MECSH intervention. They were highly influential to their children's Good and Poor language outcomes by 5 years, when over time they were combined with characteristics such as early childhood education, poor maternal responsivity and/or the number of children in the home. Knowledge of early conditions associated with later Poor language can help clinicians identify and respond in preventative and promoting ways to improve language skills. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectChildren experiencing adversity are more vulnerable to language difficulties. Both risk for language difficulties and protection against them in this group are via a complex combination of factors. It is unknown how intervention works with these complex factors to result in Good and Poor language outcomes.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThere are multiple paths to both Good and Poor language outcomes for children experiencing adversity. Mothers' psychological resources antenatally in combination with other key factors were particularly influential to Good and Poor language outcomes.What are the clinical implications of this work?In this study, maternal antenatal distress together with poor maternal responsivity were present in children's paths to Poor language outcomes at school entry. An extra focus on responsivity is required in antenatally distressed mothers of children experiencing adversity in early interventions. Children of mothers with good psychological resources antenatally who received home visiting intervention had Good language outcomes at 5 years when combined with 3 years or more of early childhood education and if there were one to two children in the home. Knowledge of these influences on language development can improve the precision of home visiting interventions and help clinicians tailor their visits to individual families' needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A total of 68% of pre‐school children with cleft palate have speech problems requiring speech therapy. There is a lack of access to regular targeted therapy. Parent training leads to positive outcomes in early communication skills in cleft palate and non‐cleft speech disorders. Connected health has been used to address inadequate access to therapy, providing intervention to those who would not otherwise receive therapy. Aims: To evaluate the speech, activity and participation outcomes of Parent Led, Therapist Supervised, Articulation Therapy (PLAT) compared with routine speech therapy intervention in parent–child dyads. Methods & Procedures: A total of 44 children, aged 2.9–7.5 years, were included in a two‐centre, two‐phase randomized controlled trial. Informed consent and assent were obtained. Participants and speech and language therapists (SLTs) were unblinded to the groups. Parents, in the parent‐trained group (n = 23), attended 2 days' training, received a detailed speech therapy programme, and undertook intervention over 12 weeks supported by the cleft specialist SLT using FaceTime and one face‐to‐face session. In the control arm (n = 21), parent–child dyads received six therapy sessions over 12 weeks with a research SLT, comparable with usual care. Speech recordings were undertaken pre‐ and post‐intervention. Percent consonant correct (PCC) was analysed by external SLTs blinded to the time and group. Activity and participation were measured using the Intelligibility in Context Scale (ICS) and Focus on Outcomes for Children Under Six (FOCUS) questionnaire. Outcomes & Results: There was no evidence of an interaction between Time and Group or an overall statistical difference between groups for PCC scores. There was a statistically significant difference over time for both groups (words: p < 0.002; confidence interval (CI) = 9.38–16.27; d = 0.57; sentences: p < 0.002; CI = 16.04–25.97; d = 0.23). Effect sizes were medium for words and small for sentences. For intelligibility and participation, there was no evidence of an interaction between Time and Group or an overall statistical difference between groups. A statistically significant difference over time was found for intelligibility (F = 29.97, d.f. = 1, 42, p < 0.001, 95 % CI = 1.45–3.15 d = 0.46) and for participation (F = 14.19, d.f. = 1, 41, p < 0.001 95% CI = 7.63–25.03; d = 0.36) with FOCUS results indicating clinically meaningful (parent‐led group) and significant (control group) change in participation. Conclusions & Implications: PLAT can be as effective as routine care in changing speech, activity and participation outcomes for children with cleft palate, when supported by a specialist cleft SLT using connected health. What this paper addsWhat is already known on this subjectOver 50% of children with cleft palate require speech therapy. However, there is a lack of timely, accessible speech therapy services in the UK and Ireland. Previous studies have shown that parents can deliver therapy effectively, and that connected health can support the delivery of speech therapy. This study aims to provide evidence that parent‐led therapy with the supervision of a specialist cleft therapist using FaceTime is effective.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis randomized controlled trial indicates that parents can be trained to deliver therapy for children with cleft palate speech disorders, under the supervision of an SLT. This approach results in improved speech, activity and participation outcomes similar to routine care.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?This study indicates that both parent‐led articulation therapy and routine care showed meaningful gains in speech, activity and participation, and that parent‐led articulation therapy when supported by a cleft SLT using connected health could be an additional service delivery model for children with cleft palate speech disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The effectiveness of two treatment approaches (phonological therapy and articulation therapy) for treatment of 14 children, aged 4;0-6;7 years, with phonologically based speech-sound disorder (SSD) has been previously analysed with severity outcome measures (percentage of consonants correct score, percentage occurrence of phonological processes and phonetic inventory). Considering that the ultimate goal of intervention for children with phonologically based SSD is to improve intelligibility, it is curious that intervention studies focusing on children's phonology do not routinely use intelligibility as an outcome measure. It is therefore important that the impact of interventions on speech intelligibility is explored. Aims This paper investigates the effectiveness of the two treatment approaches (phonological therapy and articulation therapy) using intelligibility measures, both in single words and in continuous speech, as the primary outcome. Methods & Procedures Fourteen children with phonologically based SSD participated in the intervention. The children were randomly assigned to phonological therapy or articulation therapy (seven children in each group). Two assessment methods were used for measuring intelligibility: a word identification task (for single words) and a rating scale (for continuous speech). Twenty-one unfamiliar adults listened and judged the children's intelligibility. Reliability analyses showed overall high agreement between listeners across both methods. Outcomes & Results Significant improvements were noted in intelligibility in both single words (paired t(6) = 4.409, p = 0.005) and continuous speech (asymptotic Z = 2.371, p = 0.018) for the group receiving phonology therapy pre- to post-treatment, but no differences in intelligibility were found for those receiving the articulation therapy pre- to post-treatment, either for single words (paired t(6) = 1.763, p = 0.128) or continuous speech (asymptotic Z = 1.442, p = 0.149). Conclusions & Implications Intelligibility measures were sensitive enough to show changes in the phonological therapy group but not in the articulation therapy group. These findings emphasize the importance of using intelligibility as an outcome measure to complement the results obtained with other severity measures when exploring the effectiveness of speech interventions. This study presents new evidence for the effectiveness of phonological therapy in improving intelligibility with children with SSD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]