Search

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: 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]