Search

Background: Early language delay is exacerbated by social disadvantage. Factors such as parents' low levels of literacy, confidence and self‐perception can affect the capacity to act on advice received, critical to empowerment. Methods used to achieve successful health outcomes in socially disadvantaged clinical populations may need enhancing. Aims: To compare the impact of standard parent‐based intervention (PBI) to enhanced PBI for young children with speech, language and communication needs (SCLN) and their families living in more socially disadvantaged populations. Methods and Procedures: A multicentre clustered blind randomised controlled trial was used to compare the effect of parent‐based group interventions to improve early language development with children (mean age 27.5 months) from more socially disadvantaged populations with an expressive vocabulary of 40 or less single words. Intervention sessions were delivered by a speech and language therapist, over a 20‐week period. Participants received one of two interventions: (1) Standard Care – indirect group PBI – (PBI) (2) Enhanced Care: indirect group enhanced PBI – (EPBI). Both standardised and non‐standardised measures were used as outcomes. Parent engagement in the intervention was captured through analysis of attendance and the Parent Activation Measure – Speech & Language Therapy (PAM‐SLT) (Insignia Health, 2014). The PAM measures a person's knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their own health and well‐being (NHS England, 2018). In this study, activation referred to parents' knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their child's language development. Outcomes and Results: One hundred fifty‐five participants were randomised at baseline. Children in both groups made significant improvements in the outcome on MacArthur‐Bates Communicative Development Inventories Sentence Length, from pre‐intervention to post‐intervention and 6 months post‐intervention (p < 0.05). Changes in vocabulary and expressive language skills were more equivocal, showing wide variation in confidence intervals for both groups. Where parents attended at least one intervention session almost all effect sizes were in favour of the EPBI intervention. Parents' activation levels significantly increased for both groups (EPBI p < 0.001, PBI p = 0.003), with a moderate effect size in favour of EPBI (Hedges' G 0.37, confidence interval –0.02 to 0.76), although wide variation was found. Conclusions and Implications: This trial provides some evidence of facilitating the language development of children with SLCN from more socially disadvantaged areas through supporting caregivers. However, we found variation in outcomes; some children made excellent progress, whilst others did not. Further exploration of parent engagement and its relationship to child language outcomes will be valuable to understanding more about mechanisms of change in interventions that involve parents. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) have a knock‐on effect on emotional well‐being, school readiness, literacy and school attainment, putting children at increased risk of long‐term consequences such as poor literacy, mental health problems and unemployment. In disadvantaged areas, the prevalence of language difficulties is higher than elsewhere. Factors such as parents' low levels of literacy, confidence and self‐perception can affect the capacity to act on advice received, critical to empowerment. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Children with SLCN from more socially disadvantaged areas can make improvements in their language development through parent intervention, although wide individual variation was found. There was some evidence that children achieve better outcomes with EPBI, which employed an interagency collaborative approach. Parent's engagement (activation levels) increased significantly over time with intervention, with the increase twice as big for EPBI. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This trial provides some evidence that it is possible to facilitate the language development of children from more socially disadvantaged areas through supporting their caregivers. Further research would be useful to determine whether increases in parent engagement are related to adherence to intervention and change in child outcomes. [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: 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: 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: Electropalatography (EPG) records details of the location and timing of tongue contacts with the hard palate during speech. It has been effective in treating articulation disorders that have failed to respond to conventional therapy approaches but, until now, its use with children and adolescents with intellectual/learning disabilities and speech disorders has been limited. Aims: To evaluate the usefulness of EPG in the treatment of speech production difficulties in children and adolescents with Down syndrome (DS) aged 8–18 years. Methods & Procedures: A total of 27 children with DS were assessed on a range of cognitive and speech and language measures and underwent additional EPG assessment. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three age‐matched groups receiving either EPG therapy, EPG‐informed conventional therapy or 'treatment as usual' over a 12‐week period. The speech of all children was assessed before therapy using the Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology (DEAP) and reassessed immediately post‐ and 3 and 6 months post‐intervention to measure percentage consonants correct (PCC). EPG recordings were made of the DEAP assessment items at all time points. Per cent intelligibility was also calculated using the Children's Speech Intelligibility Measure (CSIM). Outcomes & Results: Gains in accuracy of production immediately post‐therapy, as measured by PCC, were seen for all groups. Reassessment at 3 and 6 months post‐therapy revealed that those who had received therapy based directly on EPG visual feedback were more likely to maintain and improve on these gains compared with the other groups. Statistical testing showed significant differences between groups in DEAP scores across time points, although the majority did not survive post‐hoc evaluation. Intelligibility across time points, as measured by CSIM, was also highly variable within and between the three groups, but despite significant correlations between DEAP and CSIM at all time points, no statistically significant group differences emerged. Conclusions & Implications: EPG was an effective intervention tool for improving speech production in many participants. This may be because it capitalizes on the relative strength of visual over auditory processing in this client group. The findings would seem to warrant an increased focus on addressing speech production difficulties in current therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Parent‐reported measures of early communication have limitations for use with infants experiencing adversity. Observational measures of early non‐verbal and verbal communicative behaviours and mother–child turn‐taking may provide a complementary method of capturing early communication skills for these children. Aims: To explore the predictive validity of verbal and non‐verbal behaviours and mother–child conversational turn‐taking (fluency and connectedness) at child age 12 months in relation to language measures at 24 and 36 months in a cohort of infants experiencing adversity. Methods & Procedures: Pregnant women experiencing adversity were recruited from maternity hospitals in Australia. At 12 months, 190 infants were videoed during mother–child free‐play. Verbal and non‐verbal communicative behaviours and fluency and connectedness were measured from the 12‐month videos. Predictive validity of 12‐month behaviours was calculated in relation to mean length of utterance and number of unique words at 24 months and Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Preschool—Second Edition (CELF‐P2) Core Language scores at 36 months. Outcomes & Results: All 12‐month behaviours had adequate specificity but poor sensitivity when compared with other predictive validity studies using published early language measures. However, in adjusted regression models, fluency and connectedness and verbal behaviours at 12 months predicted unique words at 24 months. Fluency and connectedness also predicted CELF‐P2 scores at 36 months. Conclusions & Implications: Findings reconfirm the difficulty in early identification of children at risk of later language difficulties. All 12‐month measures were more accurate at identifying those children who will have better language than those children who will not. As fluency and connectedness was the only measure to predict 24‐ and 36‐month language in adjusted regression models, it may be an important factor to consider when measuring early language skills for infants experiencing adversity. Future research could combine observational measures of early communication and fluency and connectedness with other predictors of language to try to increase prediction accuracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Dysphagia is common after stroke, affecting up to 50% of patients initially. It can lead to post‐stroke pneumonia, which causes 30% of stroke‐related deaths, a longer hospital stay and poorer health outcomes. Dysphagia care post‐stroke generally focuses on the management of symptoms, via modified oral intake textures and adapted posture, rather than direct physical rehabilitation of the swallowing function. Transcutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is a promising rehabilitation technology that can be used to stimulate swallowing; however, findings regarding efficacy have been conflicting. Aims: This pilot randomized controlled study involving three UK sites compared the efficacy of the Ampcare Effective Swallowing Protocol (ESP), combining NMES with swallow‐strengthening exercises, with usual care in order to clarify evidence on NMES in the treatment of dysphagia post‐stroke. A further objective was to pilot recruitment procedures and outcome measures in order to inform the design of a full‐scale trial. Methods & Procedures: Thirty patients were recruited and randomized into either (1) usual speech and language therapy dysphagia care; or (2) Ampcare ESP, receiving treatment 5 days/week for 4 weeks. Outcome measures included: the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS), the Rosenbek Penetration‐Aspiration Scale (PAS) and patient‐reported outcomes (Swallow Related Quality of Life—SWAL‐QOL). Outcomes & Results: Thirty patients were recruited; 15 were randomized to the Ampcare ESP intervention arm and 15 to usual care. A greater proportion (75%, or 9/12) of patients receiving Ampcare ESP improved compared with 57% (or 8/14) of the usual‐care group. Patients receiving Ampcare ESP also made clinically meaningful change (a comparative benefit of 1.5 on the FOIS, and on the PAS: 1.35 for diet and 0.3 for fluids) compared with usual care. The intervention group also reported much better outcome satisfaction. Conclusions & Implications: The pilot demonstrated successful recruitment, treatment safety and tolerability and clinically meaningful outcome improvements, justifying progression to a fully powered study. It also showed clinically meaningful treatment trends for the Ampcare ESP intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Identifying risk and protective factors for language development informs interventions for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). Maternal responsive and intrusive communicative behaviours are associated with language development. Mother–child interaction quality may influence how children use these behaviours in language learning. Aims: To identify (1) communicative behaviours and interaction quality associated with language outcomes; (2) whether the association between a maternal intrusive behaviour (directive) and child language scores changed alongside a maternal responsive behaviour (expansion); and (3) whether interaction quality modified these associations. Methods & Procedures: Language skills were assessed at 24, 36 and 48 months in 197 community‐recruited children who were slow to talk at 18 months. Mothers and 24‐month‐olds were video‐recorded playing at home. Maternal praise, missed opportunities, and successful and unsuccessful directives (i.e., whether followed by the child) were coded during a 10‐min segment. Interaction quality was rated using a seven‐point fluency and connectedness (FC) scale, during a 5‐min segment. Linear regressions examined associations between these behaviours/rating and language scores. Interaction analysis and simple slopes explored effect modification by FC. Outcomes & Results: There was no evidence that missed opportunities or praise were associated with language scores. Higher rates of successful directives in the unadjusted model and unsuccessful directives in the adjusted model were associated with lower 24‐month‐old receptive language scores (e.g., unsuccessful directives effect size (ES) = −0.41). The association between unsuccessful directives and receptive language was weaker when adjusting for co‐occurring expansions (ES = −0.34). Both types of directives were associated with poorer receptive and expressive language scores in adjusted models at 36 and 48 months (e.g., unsuccessful directive and 48‐month receptive language, ES = −0.66). FC was positively associated with 24‐, 36‐ and 48‐month language scores in adjusted models (e.g., receptive language at 24 months, ES = 0.21, at 48 months, ES = 0.18). Interaction analysis showed the negative association between successful directives and 24‐month receptive language existed primarily in poorly connected dyads with low FC levels. Conclusions & Implications: These findings illustrate the effects of the combined interaction between different maternal communicative behaviours and features of the interaction itself on child language development, and the need to consider both in research and practice. Whilst more intrusive directives were associated with poorer language scores, this association attenuated when adjusting for co‐occurring responsive expansions, and the association was strongest for children in lower quality interactions. This work may inform clinical practice by helping clinicians target the most appropriate communicative behaviours for specific mother–child dyads. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background While practitioners are increasingly asked to be mindful of the evidence base of intervention programmes, evidence from rigorous trials for the effectiveness of interventions that promote oral language abilities in the early years is sparse. Aims To evaluate the effectiveness of a language intervention programme for children identified as having poor oral language skills in preschool classes. Methods & Procedures A randomized controlled trial was carried out in 13 UK nursery schools. In each nursery, eight children ( N = 104, mean age = 3 years 11 months) with the poorest performance on standardized language measures were selected to take part. All but one child were randomly allocated to either an intervention ( N = 52) or a waiting control group ( N = 51). The intervention group received a 15-week oral language programme in addition to their standard nursery curriculum. The programme was delivered by trained teaching assistants and aimed to foster vocabulary knowledge, narrative and listening skills. Outcomes & Results Initial results revealed significant differences between the intervention and control group on measures of taught vocabulary. No group differences were found on any standardized language measure; however, there were gains of moderate effect size in listening comprehension. Conclusions & Implications The study suggests that an intervention, of moderate duration and intensity, for small groups of preschool children successfully builds vocabulary knowledge, but does not generalize to non-taught areas of language. The findings strike a note of caution about implementing language interventions of moderate duration in preschool settings. The findings also highlight the importance of including a control group in intervention studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]