Search

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 Intensive treatment has been repeatedly recommended for the treatment of speech deficits in childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). However, differences in treatment outcomes as a function of treatment intensity have not been systematically studied in this population. Aim To investigate the effects of treatment intensity on outcome measures related to articulation, functional communication and speech intelligibility for children with CAS undergoing individual motor speech intervention. Methods & Procedures A total of 37 children (32-54 months of age) with CAS received 1×/week (lower intensity) or 2×/week (higher intensity) individual motor speech treatment for 10 weeks. Assessments were carried out before and after a 10-week treatment block to study the effects of variations in treatment intensity on the outcome measures. Outcomes & Results The results indicated that only higher intensity treatment (2×/week) led to significantly better outcomes for articulation and functional communication compared with 1×/week (lower intensity) intervention. Further, neither lower nor higher intensity treatment yielded a significant change for speech intelligibility at the word or sentence level. In general, effect sizes for the higher intensity treatment groups were larger for most variables compared with the lower intensity treatment group. Conclusions & Implications Overall, the results of the current study may allow for modification of service delivery and facilitate the development of an evidence-based care pathway for children with CAS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]