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: 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]