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: 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 & 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: 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: Many people with aphasia have word‐finding difficulties, with some showing particular difficulties with verbs. Picture‐naming therapy is often used to improve naming, but gains are usually limited to therapy items and do not transfer to conversation. Therapy where words are produced in sentences and in real‐life activities may be more effective. Aims: The current pilot study investigated whether an activity‐oriented therapy approach would be accepted and viable if implemented in a community setting, and whether communicating whilst cooking was more beneficial than using paper‐based activities. If successful, it would be expected that verb production would improve in structured and unstructured tasks in both naming and narrative tasks. Methods & Procedures: The study employed a case‐series repeated‐measures design, with testing of treated and control items. Seven adults with anomia participated, although only five completed the full programme. Participants were divided into two groups and each group completed both treatments, but in different orders. Each treatment was employed for six 2‐h sessions over a 3‐week period. Outcomes & Results: Naming of both treated and untreated verbs showed a statistically significant improvement following both treatments and this continued into the maintenance phase. There was a numerical but not statistically significant gain in the variety of verbs used in spoken narratives. Participants predominantly chose positive terms to describe their experience of the programme, but did not prefer one therapy over the other. Conclusions & Implications: Preliminary findings suggest that an activity‐oriented therapy approach, whether it involves carrying out tasks or paper‐based activities, can result in clinically meaningful improvements for people with chronic aphasia. Further research using a randomized control trial is required to determine whether cooking therapy alone is effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech‐sound development in preschoolers with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) as a group is delayed/disordered, and obstruents comprise the most vulnerable sound class. Aims: To evaluate the development of obstruent correctness (PCC‐obs) and error types (cleft speech characteristics (CSCs) and developmental speech characteristics (DSCs)) from ages 3–5 and to investigate possible predictors (error types, velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD) and gender) of PCC‐obs at age 5 in two groups of children with UCLP. Methods & Procedures: Subgroup analysis was conducted within a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) of primary surgery (Scandcleft Project). A total of 125 Danish children with UCLP received lip and soft palate repair around 4 months of age and early hard palate closure at 12 months (EHPC group) or late hard palate closure at 36 months (LHPC group). Audio and video recordings of a naming test were available for 108 children at ages 3 and 5, and recordings were transcribed phonetically by blinded raters. Outcomes & Results: PCC‐obs scores increased significantly from ages 3–5 in both groups, but with small effect sizes in the EHPC group that had higher scores at age 3 than the LHPC group. DSCs decreased in both groups whereas CSCs only decreased in the LHPC group that had more CSCs at age 3 than the EHPC group. The frequency of CSCs at age 3 was a significant predictor of PCC‐obs scores at age 5 in both groups. DSCs significantly improved the logistic regression model in the EHPC group, whereas VPD and gender did not significantly improve the model in either group. Conclusions & Implications: Although PCC‐obs developed significantly from ages 3 to 5, children with UCLP as a group did not catch up to typically developing Danish children at age 5. Furthermore, the LHPC group at age 5 did not reach the 3‐year level of the EHPC group, which means that delaying hard palate closure until age 3 is detrimental to obstruent development. Both CSCs and DSCs at age 3 were important predictors of PCC‐obs at age 5 and should be considered when determining need for intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Differing results regarding articulation skills in young children with cleft palate (CP) have been reported and often interpreted as a consequence of different surgical protocols. Aims: To assess the influence of different timing of hard palate closure in a two‐stage procedure on articulation skills in 3‐year‐olds born with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Secondary aims were to compare results with peers without CP, and to investigate if there are gender differences in articulation skills. Furthermore, burden of treatment was to be estimated in terms of secondary surgery, hearing and speech therapy. Methods & Procedures: A randomized controlled trial (RCT). Early hard palate closure (EHPC) at 12 months versus late hard palate closure (LHPC) at 36 months in a two‐stage procedure was tested in a cohort of 126 Danish‐speaking children born with non‐syndromic UCLP. All participants had the lip and soft palate closed around 4 months of age. Audio and video recordings of a naming test were available from 113 children (32 girls and 81 boys) and were transcribed phonetically. Recordings were obtained prior to hard palate closure in the LHPC group. The main outcome measures were percentage consonants correct adjusted (PCC‐A) and consonant errors from blinded assessments. Results from 36 Danish‐speaking children without CP obtained previously by Willadsen in 2012 were used for comparison. Outcomes & Results: Children with EHPC produced significantly more target consonants correctly (83%) than children with LHPC (48%; p < .001). In addition, children with LHPC produced significantly more active cleft speech characteristics than children with EHPC (p < .001). Boys achieved significantly lower PCC‐A scores than girls (p = .04) and produced significantly more consonant errors than girls (p = .02). No significant differences were found between groups regarding burden of treatment. The control group performed significantly better than the EHPC and LHPC groups on all compared variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]