Search

Background and Objectives: Evidence suggests telehealth in speech and language therapy can enhance access to care, cost‐effectiveness and satisfaction. However, little is known about use of telehealth in the United Kingdom. Moreover, many assessments/outcome measures for aphasia have been tested for face‐to‐face administration only, posing challenges to reliable use within the telehealth context. We explored the experiences and views of speech and language therapists (SLTs) working with people with aphasia on using telehealth to conduct assessments/outcome measures, perceived barriers and facilitators in telehealth, and their priorities for research in telehealth aphasia assessment. Method: We explored views of UK SLTs through an online cross‐sectional survey (2021) delivered through the Qualtrics platform. The survey covered three main areas: (i) participant demographics; (ii) experience of using telehealth and doing telehealth assessments with people with aphasia post‐stroke during the COVID‐19 pandemic; and (iii) plans for telehealth post‐pandemic. Response formats included yes/no, multiple choice, 5‐point Likert scales and open‐ended text responses. The survey was expected to take no more than 10 min to complete. Survey data were analysed through descriptive statistics and content analysis of open‐ended questions. Results: One hundred twenty‐four SLTs responded to the survey. The majority (>80%) used telehealth during the COVID‐19 pandemic and >90% planned to continue to use telehealth in the future. The most used platforms were Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Attend Anywhere. Access to internet and telehealth platforms, and practical problems (e.g., difficulties sharing resources online, limited functionality of telehealth platforms for assessment) were common barriers. Therapists highlighted that training, resources and materials that assist the administration of assessments were important. Most participants responded that there was a need for existing measures to be tested for administration via telehealth (n = 68, 70.8%). Participants overall felt there was a need for online interactive assessments, more online resources that have been trialled for use via telehealth, accessible formats for resources for people with aphasia and clear instructions for how people with aphasia can access resources. Conclusions: This study provides new insights into the current use of telehealth assessment with people with aphasia in the United Kingdom and directions for future research. Barriers and facilitators identified can support the implementation of telehealth assessment in SLT services. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: The use of telehealth in speech and language therapy has advantages in terms of access to care, cost‐effectiveness and satisfaction with care. However, little is known about the use of telehealth in aphasia rehabilitation in the United Kingdom, especially in the area of assessment and outcome measurement. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study identified that the majority (>80%) of aphasia therapists used telehealth during the COVID‐19 pandemic and >90% planned to continue to use telehealth in the future. A need was identified for existing measures to be tested for administration via telehealth and for training, resources (e.g., online interactive assessments) and materials (e.g., accessible formats for people with aphasia). What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: To facilitate the successful implementation of telehealth assessment, there is a need for measures validated for use via telehealth and more online resources that have been trialled for use via telehealth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of many interventions used by speech and language therapists (SLTs) is to change behaviours related to communication and interaction. Parent‐led language interventions for children in the early years (0–5 years) rely on SLTs supporting parents to change their behaviour in child‐focused interactions to effect a change in the child's communication. Therapeutic techniques used by SLTs in parent‐led language interventions are largely underspecified, impacting on intervention reporting, replication, trialling and development. The Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy Version 1 (BCTTv1) offers a method of describing intervention techniques developed for use in public health interventions, but with several examples of its application to speech and language interventions. Aims: To identify behaviour change techniques (BCTs) from the BCTTv1 occurring in parent‐led language interventions for children in the early years. Methods & Procedures: A literature search identified relevant descriptions of parent‐led language interventions. These were coded using the BCTTv1. A reliability check was carried out on 10% of the descriptions. To confirm the use of identified BCTs in clinical practice, results of the literature search were triangulated with an online survey of SLTs, and observations of SLTs delivering parent‐led language intervention. Outcomes & Results: A total of 84 papers containing descriptions of 45 interventions were coded; 62 SLTs responded to the survey and three SLTs were observed delivering parent‐led language intervention. A total of 24 BCTs were identified in the literature search, replicated in the observations and verified by SLTs in the survey. BCTs were identified at two levels: Level 1 SLT implemented to change parent interactive behaviour; and Level 2 parent implemented to change child communicative behaviour. Conclusions & Implications: The BCTTv1 is a useful starting place for describing parent‐led language interventions. With some additions and adjustments, BCTs identified in this study were immediately recognized by practitioners and can easily be adopted into practice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Techniques used in SLT interventions are often not clearly described. The BCTTv1 has been used to clarify technique descriptions with success in a small number of SLT disciplines, but not yet in parent‐led language interventions for preschoola children. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge: This paper constitutes the first research into quantifying the techniques used in parent‐led language interventions using the BCTTv1. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This paper provides a clear list of techniques used by SLTs implementing interventions for preschool children, which can be immediately adopted and used in practice. It also highlights potential adjustments and gaps in the BCTTv1 in relation to SLT which can contribute to future iterations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Telehealth for paediatric speech and language therapy became one of the most salient modes of service delivery during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Evidence for speech and language therapy services via telehealth in comparison to face‐to‐face delivery demonstrates promising outcomes, and studies have begun to explore practitioner and client experiences. However, across the literature, many critical elements of services are overlooked, and there is a need to frame the evidence base within a theoretical model that can draw out practical implications that consider the range of factors having an impact on clinical implementation in real‐world contexts. The APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side‐effects, and Equity) criteria offer such a model. The current study explored practising UK speech and language therapists' (SLTs) clinical experience of telehealth through the lens of the APEASE criteria and aimed to identify recommendations for future service provision from the practitioner perspective. Methods: An online survey structured using the APEASE criteria was developed in collaboration with the UK Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Four hundred and thirty‐eight qualified and practicing UK paediatric SLTs completed the survey. Telehealth was broadly acceptable and practicable to SLTs yet there remains some uncertainty about its efficacy and cost‐effectiveness compared to face‐to‐face interventions and how equitable it is for different population groups. SLTs reported that effective implementation of telehealth services was dependent upon several contextual factors; affordability was a perceived barrier to clients having access to telehealth resources, intervention via telehealth was perceived as more acceptable than assessment, and whilst many SLTs welcomed aspects of telehealth, there were concerns about the physical and mental health consequences for practitioners. Six themes for the future development of telehealth in paediatric speech and language therapy were identified: (1) balanced and tailored services; (2) technology and equipment; (3) information and communication; (4) capacity building; (5) monitoring and evaluation; and (6) leadership and governance. Conclusions: Outcomes highlight promising, concerning and uncertain aspects of telehealth in paediatric speech and language therapy. SLTs value a flexible and tailored approach to service delivery and recommend that effective leadership, clear communication, ongoing policy and guidance development, upskilling of users and careful evaluation of impact are required to ensure optimal implementation. The APEASE criteria offer a valuable opportunity to enhance and streamline practice and research to ensure sustainable implementation of telehealth in the paediatric speech and language therapy services of tomorrow. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: The COVID‐19 pandemic led to the increased use of telehealth as a main mode of service delivery in paediatric speech and language therapy. Pre‐COVID‐19, evidence for the use of telehealth in this field included small‐scale experimental studies that reported on children with particular disorders and explored telehealth outcomes in comparison to face‐to‐face delivery. The realities of at‐scale clinical practice were not well‐represented, and critical elements of service such as cost‐effectiveness were often overlooked in the paediatric literature. Furthermore, despite emerging global evidence for temporary telehealth responses to the crisis in speech and language therapy, the long‐term and future use of telehealth remains unclear. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: The current study applied the lens of the APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side‐effects, and Equity) criteria, which were used in this case to consider socioeconomic, ecological and cultural factors to capture an overarching understanding of the use of telehealth in paediatric speech and language therapy, and to inform the role of telehealth in future, longer‐term and at‐scale service development. Results indicated emerging trends in UK paediatric speech and language therapists' (SLTs') perceptions of telehealth and SLTs perceived a hybrid approach to service delivery, combining mostly face‐to‐face services with some telehealth, was likely to continue in the future. We identified six themes to guide the future development of telehealth in paediatric speech and language therapy services: (1) balanced and tailored services; (2) technology and equipment; (3) information and communication; (4) capacity building; (5) monitoring and evaluation; and (6) leadership and governance. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: UK SLTs believe that speech and language therapy services using telehealth should be reflective, tailored and flexible to meet the requirements and circumstances of the children, young people and families served, as well as the physical and emotional needs of practitioners. SLTs recommend that this service development is clearly communicated to all stakeholders and suggested that those using telehealth should be supported through appropriate training, and ongoing effectiveness should be monitored. Telehealth is here to stay and the APEASE criteria offer a unique opportunity to ensure sustainable models of service delivery; to support co‐ordinated leadership at the local, national and international levels and the development of policy and clinical guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many speech sound disorder (SSD) interventions with a long‐term evidence base are 'new' to clinical practice, and the role of services in supporting or constraining capacity for practice change is underexplored. Innovations from implementation science may offer solutions to this research–practice gap but have not previously been applied to SSD. Aim: To explain variation in speech and language therapy service capacity to implement new SSD interventions. Methods & Procedures: We conducted an intensive, case‐based qualitative study with 42 speech and language therapists (SLTs) in three NHS services (n = 39) and private practice (n = 3) in Scotland. We explored therapists' diverse experiences of SSD practice change through individual interviews (n = 28) or self‐generated paired (n = 2) or focus groups (n = 3). A theoretical framework (Normalization Process Theory) helped us understand how the service context contributed to the way therapists engaged with different practice changes. Outcomes & Results: We identified six types ('cases') of practice change, two of which involved the new SSD interventions. We focus on these two cases ('Transforming' and 'Venturing') and use Normalization Process Theory's Cognitive participation construct to explain implementation (or not) of new SSD interventions in routine practice. Therapists were becoming aware of the new interventions through knowledge brokers, professional networks and an intervention database. In the Transforming case, new SSD interventions for selected children were becoming part of local routine practice. Transforming was the result of a favourable service structure, a sustained and supported 'push' that made implementation of the new interventions a service priority, and considerable collective time to think about doing it. 'Venturing' happened where the new SSD interventions were not a service priority. It involved individual or informal groups of therapists trying out or using one or more of the new interventions with selected children within the constraints of their service context. Conclusions & implications: New, evidence‐based SSD interventions may be challenging to implement in routine practice because they have in common a need for therapists who understand applied linguistics and can be flexible with service delivery. Appreciating what it really takes to do routine intervention differently is vital for managers and services who have to make decisions about priorities for implementation, along with realistic plans for resourcing and supporting it. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Many SSD interventions have an evidence base but are not widely adopted into routine clinical practice. Addressing this is not just about individual therapists or education/training, as workplace pressures and service delivery models make it difficult to change practice. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge: This paper applies innovations from implementation science to help explain how what is going on in services can support or constrain capacity for implementing evidence‐based SSD interventions. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Service managers and therapists will have a clearer idea of the time and support they may realistically have to invest for new SSD interventions to be used routinely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research is beginning to shed light on the practices employed by speech‐language therapists (SLTs) for the management of acquired dysarthria. However, studies that explore SLTs' satisfaction with the effectiveness of current therapies and their interest in new treatment methods for this population have not been carried out. One potential new method is neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES): the pool of evidence for its use in rehabilitation is increasing, yet it has not been widely explored for use with dysarthria. Aim: To extend the understanding of acquired dysarthria management practices employed by SLTs across the globe and determine their satisfaction with current therapy options. To explore their interest in using NMES with this population. Methods and Procedures: A cross‐sectional international online survey was developed and disseminated to SLTs working with adults with acquired dysarthria through international professional associations. The survey collected information on demographic characteristics, dysarthria management practices, satisfaction with treatment effectiveness and interest in and knowledge of NMES. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, and quantitative content analysis. Outcomes and Results: A total of 211 SLTs (North America, 48.8%; Europe, 36%; Asia, 8.1%; Oceania, 5.7%; Africa, 0.9%; South America, 0.5%) completed the survey in full. Management practices varied considerably. There was a clear preference for informal assessments, mainly oral‐motor examinations, focusing on body functions and structures. The majority of respondents rejected the use of non‐speech oral motor exercises as a clinical or carryover exercise. Variable satisfaction with current speech subsystem treatments was noted; however, overall, there was a general dissatisfaction. Whilst a strong interest in the use of NMES for dysarthria was evidenced, it was noted that most SLTs lacked fundamental knowledge of NMES principles and application. Conclusion: SLTs' management practices and satisfaction with acquired dysarthria treatments differed substantially. Investigations of the potential use of NMES for dysarthria treatment are of interest. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Recent country‐specific surveys have explored speech‐language therapists' (SLTs') assessment and intervention practices for acquired dysarthria. These studies indicate that although clinical management for this speech disorder mainly involves informal assessment tools and impairment‐focused treatment, communication beyond the impairment, such as the activity and participation domains, is also frequently assessed and treated. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: The majority of SLTs are dissatisfied with the overall benefits of current acquired dysarthria treatment. Phonatory, respiration and speech rate therapies are perceived to be more effective than prosody, articulation and resonance treatments. Despite a general lack of theoretical knowledge, most SLTs are interested in neuromuscular electrical stimulation treatment for acquired dysarthria. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: New, evidence‐based treatments are needed for SLTs to be confident in the effectiveness of their acquired dysarthria treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Spoken discourse is commonly affected after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Although guidelines recommend prioritizing discourse‐level skills in cognitive communication management, previous literature has highlighted challenges in managing discourse clinically. Little is known about how speech–language pathologists (SLPs) assess and treat discourse after TBI. Aims: To investigate current SLP practice to determine the alignment of clinical practice with research evidence and recommendations. Methods & Procedures: This online survey consisted of 30 questions on SLPs' practice with discourse assessment, analysis and treatment processes, including the materials and methods used and rationales for decision‐making. Participants were recruited through national and international SLP professional bodies, TBI‐specific or SLP special‐interest groups and social media. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive statistics, with free text included to support individual responses. Outcomes & Results: There were 70 participants, from Australia, the United States, UK and New Zealand. Nearly half the participants had over 11 years of experience working with adults with TBI and a quarter had over 20 years of experience. Participants reported that they regularly evaluated the discourse ability of people with TBI, most commonly during spontaneous conversation or with a personal narrative task. Discourse intervention approaches mostly targeted client self‐monitoring ability, social skills or conversational interactions. Practice varied dependent on setting, with more SLPs in community or outpatient services undertaking discourse assessment and treatment than in hospital settings. Conclusions & Implications: Overall, survey respondents' management of spoken discourse aligned with recommendations in the research literature, incorporating an individualized, goal‐based approach. Factors affecting the use of discourse in practice included client‐specific factors and needs, availability of time for transcription and analysis, and SLPs' knowledge level and confidence with discourse. Increased knowledge of discourse methods and treatment approaches could help inform decision‐making for SLPs working in TBI. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Spoken discourse is one of the most affected areas of communication for people with TBI. Although recent research has provided guidance on assessment and treatment options for TBI discourse, it is unknown how SLPs manage spoken discourse clinically. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This research adds to the limited research on how SLPs across clinical settings and regions manage discourse assessment and treatment. Respondents' practice was generally aligned with recommendations, featuring individualized, goal‐based practice. Potential barriers to discourse implementation included client factors and SLP knowledge, training, and service delivery factors. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This survey provides evidence that clinical translation is starting to occur in this field, but there remains a need for increased knowledge of assessment and treatment methods, training, and TBI‐specific resources to better support SLP practice, particularly relating to transcription. Core reporting outcomes in research on TBI discourse management would assist with translation of the findings to practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2016/17, the CATALISE Consortium published the results of a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study, representing agreement among professionals about the definition and process of identification of children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) (Bishop et al., 2016, 2017). The extent to which the current clinical practice of UK speech and language therapists (SLTs) reflects the CATALISE consensus statements is unknown. Aims: To investigate how UK SLTs' expressive language assessment practices reflect the CATALISE documents' emphasis on the functional impairment and impact caused by DLD, by examining: whether multiple sources of assessment information are gathered; how standardised and non‐standardised sources are combined in clinical decision‐making, and how clinical observation and language sample analysis are utilised. Methods and Procedures: An anonymous, online survey was carried out between August 2019 and January 2020. It was open to UK‐based paediatric SLTs who assess children up to age 12 with unexplained difficulties using language. Questions probed different aspects of expressive language assessment which are referred to in the CATALISE consensus statements and supplementary comments, and asked about participants' familiarity with the CATALISE statements. Responses were analysed using simple descriptive statistics and content analysis. Outcomes and Results: The questionnaire was completed by 104 participants, from all four regions of the United Kingdom, working in a range of clinical settings with different levels of professional experience of DLD. The findings indicate that clinical assessment practices broadly align with the CATALISE statements. Although clinicians carry out standardised assessments more frequently than other types of assessment, they also gather information from other sources and use this alongside standardised test scores to inform clinical decisions. Clinical observation and language sample analysis are commonly utilised to evaluate functional impairment and impact, along with parent/carer/teacher and child report. However, asking about the child's own perspective could be more widely utilised. The findings also highlight a lack of familiarity with the details of the CATALISE documents among two thirds of the participants. Conclusions and Implications: Assessment practices broadly align with the CATALISE statements, but there is a need for greater clarity regarding terminology and the assessment of functional language impairment and impact. This research should prompt discussion in the profession about how to further develop and adopt expressive language assessment practices which reflect the CATALISE consensus and support effective assessment. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: The CATALISE consortium documents on Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) were published in 2016/17. The extent to which expressive language assessment practice in the United Kingdom reflects the new definition and statements on assessment has not previously been investigated. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This survey indicates that speech and language therapists in the United Kingdom assessing children for DLD mostly balance standardised language test scores with other sources of information in clinical decision‐making, and utilise clinical observation and language sample analysis to consider functional impairment and the impact of the language disorder. However, important questions are raised regarding the robustness and objectivity with which these key parameters are currently defined and evaluated. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Clinicians, individually and at service level, are encouraged to reflect on their assessment of functional impairment and the impact of language disorder and to take steps to incorporate this where necessary. Professional guidance and clinical tools to facilitate robust, objective assessment would support clinical practice that aligns with expert consensus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech and language therapists (SLTs) and care home activities staff play key roles in managing and supporting the communication needs of older residents in care homes. However, the current practice and perspectives of these two professions in the United Kingdom has not been examined. Aims: To investigate the practice patterns and views of SLTs and activities staff working in UK care homes for older adults in relation to residents' communication needs. Methods and Procedures: Two online surveys, with 63 questions (SLT survey) and 46 questions (activities staff survey) in total, were created using the online platform Qualtrics. Participants were asked to consider their routine practice before COVID‐19. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis. Outcomes and Results: A total of 116 valid responses were received from SLTs and 29 valid responses from activities staff. A high level of communication needs in care homes was reported by both participant groups, as was insufficient time and resources and lack of managerial encouragement in this area. SLTs reported that the majority of referrals to their service from care homes was for swallowing needs (70%). Cognitive communication difficulty was the most commonly reported communication need by SLTs (65%). Most SLTs (73%–87%) provided some level of communication intervention and considered management of residents' communication needs to be both part of the SLT role and a good investment of their time. Lack of confidence setting goals and providing direct intervention for communication needs was reported, with 25% feeling stressed at the thought of this. The main themes from free text responses about SLT service improvement were increased staff training, funding (of resources and specialist posts) and changes to service provision (referral criteria and accessibility/awareness of SLT service). Hearing impairment was the communication need most commonly reported by activities staff (43%). Participants demonstrated relatively high awareness of communication difficulty in residents and reported high levels of knowledge and confidence identifying and supporting residents' communication. Most (79%–89%) considered identifying and supporting the communication needs of residents to be part of their role and expressed interest in receiving further training in communication support. The reported activities staff data set may be positively biased. Conclusions and Implications: SLTs and activities staff were highly motivated to support the communication needs of care home residents. Increased training, time and resources dedicated to managing the communication needs of residents emerged as opportunities for service improvement across both data sets. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: There is a high level of communication need amongst older care home residents. Social interaction and relationships are important factors contributing to quality of life in this population and rely on successful communication. Speech and language therapists (SLTs) and activities staff play key roles in managing and supporting the communication needs of this client group, but the current practice and perspectives of these professions in the United Kingdom has not been examined. What this study adds: A high level of communication need in care home residents was identified by both SLT and activities staff and both participant groups were motivated to address, identify and manage this need. However, insufficient time and resources, as well as a perceived lack of encouragement from managers to provide communication support/intervention, were reported by both groups. SLT practice was constrained by referral criteria and care pathways, which differed between services. Suggestions for SLT service improvement are reported. Clinical implications of this study: Targeted, ongoing staff training is required in care homes to improve the communication environment and develop care home staff capacity to support residents' communication needs. There is also a call for service level improvements to increase the range of SLT practice in care homes, including a greater focus on communication needs and more specialist (e.g., dementia) SLT roles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Above cuff vocalisation (ACV) involves the application of an external flow of air via the subglottic port of a tracheostomy. ACV can facilitate vocalisation and may improve swallowing and quality of life for patients with a tracheostomy. A recent systematic review highlighted the limited evidence available for the acceptability, effectiveness, safety or optimal implementation of ACV. Aims: To explore the experience of healthcare professionals (HCPs) using ACV and their perceptions of best practice. Methods and Procedures: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with a range of HCPs with experience using ACV. Topics included: experiences with ACV, management of ACV, opinions about ACV, impact of COVID‐19, future directions for ACV and impact on length of stay. Interviews were conducted online from December 2020 to March 2022. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Outcomes and Results: Twenty‐four HCPs were interviewed from seven countries and five professional groups. Four interconnected themes were developed: (1) moral distress amplifying the need to fix patients; (2) subjectivity and uncertainty leading to variations in practice and purpose; (3) knowledge and experience leading to control and caution; and (4) worth a try or a last resort. Theme four contained three sub‐themes: (a) part of the toolbox; (b) useful but limited tool; and (c) following the patient's lead. The moral distress experienced by HCPs and their essential 'need to fix' patients seems to underpin the varied opinions of ACV. These opinions appear to be formed primarily on the basis of experience, because of the underlying subjectivities and uncertainties. As knowledge and experience with ACV increased, and adverse events were experienced, most HCPs became more cautious in their approach to ACV. Conclusions and Implications: More research is needed to reduce the subjectivities and uncertainties surrounding ACV. The implementation of standardised procedures, processes, and competencies may help to reduce the frequency of adverse events and support a more controlled approach. Widening the focus of the purpose of ACV to include swallowing may help to maximise the potential benefits. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: There is limited and low‐quality evidence for above cuff vocalisation (ACV) and clinical application and practice varies substantially. However, the reasons for this variation in practice and healthcare professionals' (HCPs') opinions of ACV were unclear. What this study adds: HCPs' experiences and opinions of ACV vary as a result of the uncertainty and subjectivity surrounding ACV compounded by their personal experiences with it. A need for caution also appears to emerge as HCPs become more familiar and experienced with using ACV. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Implementing standardised procedures, safety processes and competencies may help to compensate for the uncertainty and subjectivity surrounding ACV and may reduce the frequency of adverse events. Widening the focus of purpose of ACV, including swallowing in addition to communication, may increase the number of potential candidates and increase the potential benefits of ACV. Using multidisciplinary team (MDT) simulation training for ACV competency development might help to improve MDT working and ACV implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Undertaking voice and communication training is an important part of the gender‐affirming journey for many trans, gender‐diverse and non‐binary individuals. Training supports the alignment of voice with gender identity helping to reduce gender dysphoria as individuals are better able to connect with their voices. However, for training to be effective, regular practice is needed and the demands of training can often be difficult to meet. Aims: To investigate the interest, attitudes and perspectives on the use of immersive virtual reality (VR) to support gender‐affirming voice and communication training by transgender, gender non‐binary and gender‐diverse people, and speech–language pathologists providing gender‐affirming voice and communication training. Methods & Procedures: A mixed‐methods survey (i.e., collecting quantitative data through multiple‐choice question and qualitative data through free text questions) was hosted online from 23 August to 21 September 2021. A total of 17 questions asked about technology use, and attitudes and perspectives towards VR. The survey included video examples of three different voice‐activated VR applications to prompt participant responses about the technology. Outcomes & Results: A total of 70 survey responses were included in the analysis. All participants had previous experience using smart phones, but only 27.2% had previously used VR. Four key themes were identified relating to potential uptake of VR in gender‐affirming voice and communication training: (1) general audience appeal, (2) perceived therapeutic value, (3) exposure to or protection from harm and (4) relatability to real life. Conclusions & Implications: VR games may represent a viable option to support practice of voice exercises. Gamification through VR is likely to motivate some to increase frequency of practice. VR applications that are used in voice training need to be fit‐for‐purpose, and detailed co‐design is necessary to build appropriate applications for future use. This study provides a foundation to inform the design, development and implementation of VR applications to be used in gender‐affirming voice training. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject?: Speech–language pathologists work closely with transgender and gender‐diverse individuals to help them achieve gender congruent voice and communication. Clients need to undertake regular and ongoing practice outside of training sessions to achieve and maintain their ideal voice. Motivation and adherence to regular practice sessions remain an ongoing challenge. What this study adds to the existing knowledge: This study explores the use of immersive VR technologies to create safe, motivating and enjoyable environments to encourage regular practice of gender‐affirming voice and communication exercises. It engages stakeholders in an early‐stage participant‐involved design to gauge interest in, and perspectives on, VR and technology‐based training support tools. The results suggest that voice‐activated VR applications would highly motivate some individuals if they were appropriately designed but would not be ideal for all. What are the actual and clinical implications of this work?: Immersion in VR can be a highly motivating tool to enhance adherence to practice schedules for some individuals. However, tools need to be specifically designed with outcomes in mind to be fit‐for‐purpose, to support individual goals and to minimize the risk of harm. The few existing VR voice‐activated applications that are available require further assessment, and redesign through co‐design with users to functionally and safely support gender‐affirming voice and communication training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children with communication disorders experience difficulty in one or more areas of articulation and speech, language, fluency, voice and social communication, and they work with speech‐language pathologists (SLPs) to improve their communication. With the rise of adoption and use for mobile applications among special education and healthcare service providers, SLPs also have implemented, and for some, contributed to the design of, mobile applications (apps) during clinical practice. However, how these mobile apps are designed and implemented for clinicians to facilitate their clients' communication and learning experiences during therapy remains underinvestigated. Aims: This qualitative research study investigated how mobile apps were designed for clinicians to target assessment and intervention goals. Additionally, it focused on how clinicians adopted these apps while integrating therapy techniques to facilitate their clients' learning. Methods and Procedures: Informed by the Research, Practice, and Design for iPad Apps (iRPD) framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 37 licensed pediatric SLPs, including 23 SLPs who have used apps and 14 SLPs who have contributed to the design of their own mobile apps. Two rounds of qualitative coding via template analysis and thematic analysis were then used to analyse client and clinician characteristics, clinical practice, therapy tools, app characteristics, influential factors and app design and use recommendations. Outcomes and Results: Results showed SLPs utilise different genres of assistive, educational and recreational game apps to support children's communication development when working with children who have diverse disorders and therapy needs across different age groups. SLPs who have designed their own apps emphasised the importance of following evidence‐based practice, well‐researched teaching methods and learning theories. Additionally, multiple financial, sociocultural, political and ethical factors contributed to the design, adoption and implementation of mobile apps during services. Conclusions and Implications: By understanding the clinician's app use practices situated in various therapy activities and techniques, we specified a list of design recommendations for app designers who are interested in creating mobile apps for supporting children's speech and language development. By bringing insights from both clinical practitioners as well as those with additional technical design backgrounds, this study contributes to the understanding of clinical practice needs and strategies and will lead to the most optimal app design and adoption practice to support the well‐being of children with communication disorders. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Speech language pathologist (SLPs) implement mobile apps for clients with diverse therapy needs, and their app adoption and use are influenced by multifaceted factors. Although prior studies have reported SLPs' mobile app use, additional information is still needed. For example, the research literature does not include how specific technology is used during therapy practice, or specific details about challenges and needs in implementing and utilising the technology. Additional research also needs to include influential factors (e.g., financial, sociocultural, political, ethical) that are considered when selecting, implementing, assessing and designing an app. The lack of research in these areas directly affects the understanding of clinical mobile technology practices and further hinders clinicians' abilities to advocate for better clinical and design decisions towards identifying and implementing effective mobile apps that facilitate children's communication. What this study adds to existing knowledge: This qualitative study is the first known empirical research that interviewed pediatric speech‐language pathologists who have used and designed mobile apps for children who receive speech‐language therapy across different clinical settings. By investigating experiences from clinician stakeholders to illustrate a holistic overview of app design and development to deployment, this study reported finding on (1) how clinicians use mobile apps to help children to participate in different therapy activities, and (2) a list of recommended design and development guidelines that informs the design and use of mobile apps that best support and motivate children to engage in therapy. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This study disseminates clinician‐reported practices of app design and use with pediatric clients across different speech‐language disorders, and identifies gaps and needs for clinicians and researchers who are interested in understanding the role of mobile technology in relationship to human communication and interaction. Additionally, the paper demonstrates that SLPs have instrumental roles rather than passive users in influencing the design and implementation of different genres of mobile apps through evidence‐based clinical practice, and call for partnerships across clinicians, special educators and technologists to support children's communication development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the governmental delineation of the speech‐language therapist (SLT) profession and in preservice SLT education, Flemish SLTs are considered as gatekeepers of the standard language in Flanders. Yet, most Flemish clients typically use a colloquial language style. Following earlier research on how teachers' language style affects teacher–student interactions, an SLT's strict adherence to standard Dutch may potentially evoke perceptions of inequality in their clients. As a result, Flemish SLTs may find themselves torn between on the one hand adhering to the standard language and on the other hand adapting to the sociolinguistic style of their client and establishing trust. In the present study, we explored SLTs' views on using standard/colloquial language varieties in their practice. Methods & Procedures: Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 13 Flemish SLTs who worked with children, adolescents and adults in special schools, private practices and hospitals. Interview transcripts were analysed with reflexive thematic analysis. Outcomes & Results: Analyses yielded three themes. Switching between styles was (1) triggered by client characteristics (age, style, therapeutic needs), and it was shaped by (2) the need for establishing trust and (3) a balance between the SLT's professional and personal identity. Notably, most SLTs described partially converging with their clients' colloquial style, effectively reconciling their professional identity as expert speakers with their personal identity as a colloquial language user. Conclusions & Implications: Despite consensus on the role of the SLT as gatekeeper of standard language, many SLTs felt that colloquial language also plays an important role as it bolsters therapeutic alliance and rehabilitation of functional communication. By implementing reflective mixed methods and integrating the client perspective, future studies should further examine how authentic style‐switching occurs and how various styles used by the SLT are evaluated by clients in different contexts. These findings may guide the development of style‐switching as a communicative strategy that can be addressed in preservice education. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: In Flanders, the existence of various (non‐)standard varieties of Dutch may evoke some tension regarding the preferred variety in a given context. Flemish teachers switch between standard language and colloquial language (style‐shifting), depending on the foregrounding of the transactional or relational nature of the context. Moving towards students' colloquial speech builds trust and perceptions of equality. Despite the importance of alliance in speech‐language therapy, little is known about how speech‐language therapists (SLTs) feel about using colloquial speech given that they are considered expert speakers. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: While 'talking properly' is part of the SLT's professional identity, many Flemish SLTs felt that strict adherence to the standard language variety hinders therapeutic alliance. While standard language was strongly associated with professionalism, strict adherence to standard language was used only when SLTs felt they had to prove their clinical competency or when language scaffolding was in the foreground. Partially converging with the clients' language use allowed SLTs to reconcile their professional identity as expert speaker with personal identity and authenticity. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Both colloquial speech and standard speech serve a function in SLT practice. Therefore, switching between standard and colloquial speech needs further consideration as a communicative strategy rather than instilling in therapists an ideological, normative stance towards language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic necessitated that speech–language therapists (SLTs) make a radical change to provide services to their clients safely via telepractice. For many practitioners, telepractice was an unfamiliar mode of practice that had to be implemented under emergency conditions. Limited literature on SLTs' experiences of implementing telepractice in the Global South during this time is available. Aims: To explore the experiences of South African SLTs (N = 45) who implemented telepractice services during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods & Procedures: SLTs across the country were invited via professional bodies to participate in an online qualitative survey distributed in 2021. Data were analysed using thematic analysis principles. Outcomes & Results: We describe participants' reports of their current telepractices, discuss their perspectives on accessibility to telepractice for SLTs, clients and caregivers, and working with specific diagnoses, and consider the support needs of SLTs to enhance telepractice services. Most participants work in private practice or school settings with primarily paediatric caseloads. They reported telepractice as a positive experience and felt it was effective, although they judged that some clients were not well served by telepractice. SLTs felt underprepared for the rapid switch to telepractice and the flexibility required, especially given the limited availability of guidelines given the pandemic crisis. Greater preparation is required for telepractice sessions and more attention needs to be paid to supporting caregiver involvement online. Conclusions & Implications: Telepractice involves various barriers and facilitators, many of which seem common across Global North and South contexts. Support is required to enhance current telepractices in terms of computer literacy, technical education, different telepractice methods and caregiver coaching. Our findings have the potential to enable the development of support, training and guidelines to improve SLTs' confidence in providing telepractice whilst delivering quality services in an accessible and safe manner. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Many SLTs had to transition quickly to telepractice service provision during COVID‐19, with limited existing guidelines and support. Although there is some literature available on SLTs' experiences of implementing telepractice in the Global North, perspectives from the Global South during this time are limited. It is important to understand experiences, barriers and facilitators to telepractice provision to provide tailored support to practitioners. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Telepractice provides a viable alternative to in‐person therapy for specific clients and contexts. Telepractice presents both benefits and barriers for effective clinical practice across Global North and South contexts. Greater preparation is required for telepractice sessions and more attention needs to be paid to enhancing caregiver involvement online, especially since many practitioners are likely to continue offering telepractice services post‐pandemic. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Clinicians felt underprepared for the rapid switch from service delivery mode to telepractice. Greater support, training and guidelines for students and practitioners are required to enhance current practices and ensure practitioners are equipped to provide effective telepractice in the future. In particular, support should cover technological aspects, caregiver coaching and online assessment options, especially for paediatric clients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Extensive variation in the terminology used for paediatric diagnoses across the speech and language therapy research literature is an internationally recognized problem. Little is known, however, about how and how often diagnoses are given in a clinical context. In the UK, speech and language therapists (SLTs) identify and support children who have speech and language needs. To understand and address clinically rooted terminological issues that may directly impact clients and families, there is a need for exploration of how the diagnostic process is operationalized in practice. Aim: To identify, from the perspective of SLTs, areas that present as enabling and obstructive factors to conducting diagnosis in clinical practice. Methods & Procedures: Taking a phenomenological approach, 22 paediatric SLTs were interviewed using a semi‐structured format. Thematic analysis revealed a number of factors that were either classified as 'enabling' or 'obstructive' to their diagnostic processes. Outcomes & Results: Participants were often hesitant to provide a diagnosis to families and universally reported the need for targeted guidance, which accounts for the demands of current clinical practice, to guide their diagnostic process. Four enabling factors were identified from participant data: (1) working to a medical model, (2) the availability of collegiate support, (3) recognizing the benefits of diagnosis,, and (4) relating to the needs of the family. Seven themes portrayed obstructive factors in practice: (1) the complex presentation of clients, (2) the risk of giving a 'wrong' diagnosis, (3) participants' uncertainty about diagnostic criteria, (4) insufficient training, (5) service models, (6) concerns about stigma and (7) not having enough clinical time. The obstructive factors created dilemmas for participants and resulted in hesitancy to give a diagnosis, potentially contributing to delays in diagnosis experienced by families as reported in previous literature. Conclusions & Implications: Of paramountcy to SLTs were the individual needs and preferences of their clients. Practical barriers and areas of uncertainty increased hesitance to diagnose, which may inadvertently preclude families from accessing resources. Recommendations include more widely accessible training in diagnostic practice, guidelines to support clinical decision‐making, and a greater understanding of client preferences with regard to terminology and its potential relationship with social stigma. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Inconsistency in terminology for paediatric language diagnoses has been broadly discussed, mostly in reference to variation within research literature. The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists' (RCSLT) position statement on developmental language disorder (DLD) and language disorder made recommendations for SLTs to use these terms in clinical practice. There is some evidence that SLTs face challenges in operationalizing diagnostic criteria in practice, particularly given financial and resource constraints. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: SLTs disclosed several issues that either supported or were obstructive to the practice of diagnosing paediatric clients and delivering this information to families. Whilst most SLTs faced constraints related to the practicalities and demands of clinical practice, a number also held reservations about the impact of a lifelong diagnosis for young clients. These issues resulted in considerable avoidance of formal diagnostic terminology, in favour of description or informal terminology. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: If diagnoses are not given, or if SLTs are using informal diagnostic terms as an alternative strategy, clients and families may experience reduced opportunities to yield benefits associated with a diagnosis. Clinical guidance that specifically addresses the prioritization of time and provides directives for clinical action in instances of uncertainty may support SLTs to feel confident in giving diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The therapeutic process is fraught with various feelings. This research focused on a specific type of negative feeling, namely self‐doubt (SD). Aim: To explore and characterize the nature of SD among speech and language therapists (SLTs) (the frequency of SD, situations that trigger SD, emotions and thoughts related to SD, and coping strategies) in various stages of occupational experience. Methods & Procedures: A total of 267 SLTs answered an online survey. Respondents represented SLTs in all stages of vocational experience, with varying academic degrees, from a variety of employment settings. The survey addressed situations that trigger SD, thoughts, and emotions associated with SD and the background information of the respondents. Frequency distributions of the responses of the participants were determined, and independent‐samples Kruskal–Wallis tests were conducted to examine if there were differences between groups that differed in their occupational experience on the frequency of SD, attitudes towards SD and emotions related to SD. Outcomes & Results: Differences were found between SLTs in various stages of professional development in several aspects of SD. Novice SLTs reported significantly higher levels of SD compared with experienced SLTs. In the face of SD, novice SLTs consider career abandonment significantly more than do experienced SLTs. They perceive themselves as a failure when experiencing SD to a significantly greater extent than do more experienced SLTs. In addition, SD is associated with various negative emotions. Conclusions & Implications: Self‐doubt is a natural professional feeling. It may be harmful especially in the early stages of professional development. Our findings call for support and guidance in the face of SD. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Healthcare professionals report feeling SD. This feeling may have deleterious effects on well‐being and career satisfaction and is especially harmful in young therapists. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study characterizes the nature of SD among SLTs in various stages of occupational experience. Our findings indicate that SD is reported among SLTs at all career stages, especially in novice SLTs. Self‐doubt is associated with a range of negative thoughts and emotions, and it may be triggered by various situations. Nonetheless, it is a topic that our respondents rarely learn about. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Normalising and validating SD is important to SLTs' resilience and may facilitate coping. This may be achieved by learning about the subject of SD in graduate programmes. In addition, mentors should create a safe learning culture to allow sharing SD and challenging situations, especially in the first years of occupational experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Supporting psychosocial well‐being in aphasia is necessarily person‐centred, interdisciplinary and coordinated. Shortcomings in such support are described in Ireland and elsewhere. Speech and language therapists (SLTs) are integral; and describing current practice and barriers they experience is important for enhancing service delivery. Aims: To understand how SLTs enact, and are supported to enact, aphasia psychosocial care in Ireland. Methods & Procedures: This is a cross‐sectional, online, self‐administered clinician survey targeting SLTs working minimally 1 year post‐qualification with persons with aphasia of any aetiology in Ireland. The survey questions were charted against key constructs of the implementation science framework, normalization process theory (NPT), and descriptive statistics were applied. Outcomes & Results: A total of 54 eligible datasets were included. SLTs believed psychosocial support to be part of their role, but perceived multiple barriers in enacting it. These included a lack of training, clinical supervision, management support, role recognition, and access to and joint working with mental health professionals and services. Conclusions & Implications: SLTs in Ireland face a range of individual and structural barriers, including care coordination and resourcing. There is a clear need not only for training, upskilling and mentorship, but also for wider changes around access to mental health professionals and clarity around the processes of referral, coordination and integration of aphasia care across settings. These findings comprise preliminary insights into current practices. Further research is needed as well as clarity on best‐practice pathways for different aetiologies of aphasia. Articulating current practices using NPT may have utility for developing empirically informed and principled interventions to improve service delivery. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: People with aphasia of all aetiologies are at risk of psychosocial problems. Shortcomings in access and the availability of appropriate support have been documented both internationally and in Ireland. To address this issue, an important first step is to understand how SLTs in Ireland currently enact and are supported to enact aphasia psychosocial care. What this study adds to the existing knowledge: The findings describe the potential levers and barriers to progressing aphasia psychosocial care in Ireland. A range of individual, team and structural factors were identified. These were locally contextualized but similar issues are reported in other countries. Linking attitudes with NPT constructs provides a first step for further principled implementation projects. What are the practical and clinical implications of this study?: Addressing psychosocial problems is perceived as a legitimate part of the speech and language therapy role. SLTs in Ireland enact a range of therapeutic approaches but may need opportunities for formal training and supervision, and for better coordination and integration with other mental health services and disciplines. Understanding differences in care pathways across the range of aphasia aetiologies is additionally important given the emphasis on post‐stroke aphasia in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Even though evidence for the use of linguistic–phonological intervention approaches in children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP±L) is still limited, these approaches are being used by speech–language pathologists (SLPs) to treat active or compensatory cleft speech disorders in clinical practice. It is, however, unknown to what extent linguistic–phonological intervention is acceptable to SLPs. The aim of this study is to investigate the retrospective acceptability of linguistic–phonological intervention in children with a CP±L from the perspective of SLPs using the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). Methods & Procedures: A total of 18 female community SLPs, aged between 23 and 63 years, were included in the study. An independent interviewer conducted semi‐structured interviews. Data were analysed using a deductive coding approach. Statements of the SLPs were related to the seven constructs of the TFA: affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness and self‐efficacy. Outcomes & Results: The affective attitude and perceived effectiveness of linguistic–phonological intervention differed among the SLPs: some therapists had positive attitudes towards these approaches, while others did not. Positive attitudes were related to the successful use of linguistic–phonological intervention in the past. The construct 'ethicality' revealed that negative attitudes towards these approaches were attributed to the limited available scientific evidence or negative experiences while using these approaches. In contrast, SLPs who had positive attitudes considered these interventions as 'important' and 'valuable'. Some SLPs had negative reflections on linguistic–phonological intervention as these approaches were considered demanding in terms of time needed to gain knowledge on using them in children with a CP±L (constructs 'burden' and 'opportunity costs'). Additionally, some SLPs doubted their self‐efficacy to use these approaches in clinical practice. Conclusions & Implications: The acceptability of linguistic–phonological intervention differed between the SLPs in this sample and was most likely related to their previous experiences with these linguistic–phonological approaches. It is important to increase not only the amount of scientific evidence for linguistic–phonological approaches but also the supply of evidence‐based workshops and training courses on this topic. These initiatives should distribute scientific information that is translated into guidelines that are immediately applicable in clinical practice. This may potentially reduce the time‐related burden that some SLPs currently experience to gain expertise in this matter. In future research, it is necessary to investigate if there exist differences in acceptability between the different types of linguistic–phonological therapy. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on this subject: Linguistic–phonological speech intervention approaches are often used by SLPs to treat active or compensatory cleft speech disorders in clinical practice. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study investigated whether linguistic–phonological intervention cleft speech intervention is acceptable to SLPs. Some therapists had positive attitudes towards these approaches, while others did not. Positive attitudes were related to the successful use of these approaches in the past. If SLPs indicated having negative attitudes, these negative feelings were attributed to the limited available scientific evidence or negative experiences while using these approaches. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work: Even though linguistic–phonological speech intervention approaches are being used in clinical practice, these approaches are not always considered acceptable by SLPs. Acceptability could be enhanced by increasing the amount of scientific evidence for linguistic–phonological approaches, but also by increasing the supply of workshops and training courses on this topic. These initiatives should distribute hands‐on information that is immediately applicable in clinical practice. This may potentially reduce the time‐related burden that some SLPs currently experience to gain expertise in this matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: In Italy, approximately 650 individuals receive a diagnosis of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) every year. Unfortunately, the frequency with which patients are referred to speech‐language services is suboptimal, likely due to skepticism regarding the value of speech‐language therapy in the context of neurodegeneration. Materials and Methods: We conducted a virtual survey of speech and language therapists (SLTs) across Italy, to collect information about the assessment, intervention and management of patients with PPA. To ensure that as many SLTs as possible received the survey, the Italian Federation of SLTs (Federazione Logopedisti Italiani, FLI) aided in disseminating the survey. Results: In total, 336 respondents participated in the online survey, 140 of whom had previous experience with PPA patients. Respondents indicated having seen a total of 428 PPA patients in the previous 24 months (three patients on average, range: 0–40). SLTs who reported never working with PPA identified underdiagnoses, low referral rates and the rarity of the clinical syndrome as major reasons for their lack of experience with PPA. SLTs with experience working with PPA indicated that patients may not have accessed services because of service dysfunction and geographical barriers. Respondents reported using informal interviews during assessments and tests developed for post‐stroke aphasia, while impairment‐based/restitutive interventions were utilised most often. Conclusion: Findings may serve to inform health policy organisations regarding the current shortcomings and needed recommendations for improving the care of individuals with PPA in Italy. Improving awareness of the utility of rehabilitation among SLTs and other clinical service providers may serve to facilitate access to intervention, which in turn will serve to better support individuals living with PPA. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Speech and language therapists (SLTs) play a crucial role in the assessment, diagnosis and treatment of people with primary progressive aphasia (PPA). However, the frequency with which individuals with PPA are referred for speech and language services is suboptimal due to skepticism regarding the value of speech and language therapy in the context of neurodegeneration, the scarcity of SLTs with expertise in the treatment of PPA and the lack of awareness of the SLT role amongst referrers. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: In recognition of the lack of published information on the provision of speech and language therapy services and clinicians' approaches to the assessment and treatment of individuals with PPA in Italy, we conducted an online survey to evaluate the current referral patterns for speech and language therapy services and to examine the current barriers to access these services for individuals with PPA in Italy. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The data presented here support that SLTs view treatment as useful for individuals with PPA and other professional figures and may serve to improve access to intervention, which in turn will serve to better support individuals living with PPA. The results highlight the need to inform health policy organisations about current gaps and aid in developing recommendations for improving the care of individuals with PPA, in order to understand how SLTs can best support individuals with PPA and their families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Much has been written about the changes in use and perspectives of telepractice among speech and language therapists (SLTs) during the global COVID‐19 pandemic. However, no long‐term study has been done to examine whether there is a permanent shift in attitudes towards telepractice as the world adjusts to new norms and endemic COVID‐19. Aims: To compare the speech telepractice use and perspectives of SLTs at two time points of the pandemic: during and after the height of the pandemic. Methods & Procedures: Two online surveys were distributed a year apart among SLTs in Singapore. The first survey was disseminated during an initial lockdown period in 2020 and the second survey was done in 2021 when Singapore was starting to reduce strict quarantine and safe‐distancing regulations. These surveys were distributed via communication channels of the local speech therapy association. A total of 115 and 71 responses to the survey were collected in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Responses were captured and analysed using descriptive statistics and statistical analysis while qualitative content analysis was used to derive key themes from open‐ended questions. Outcomes & Results: Telepractice use across all age groups and client types peaked at the height of the pandemic. Even as lockdown measures were eased, telepractice utilization was still higher than what it was before the pandemic. Dysphagia management was the only area where SLTs reduced their use of telepractice during the stabilization phase. After more experience with telepractice during the height of the pandemic, SLTs acknowledged the benefit of being able to use a wide range of media through telepractice and were less worried about not having the resources or knowledge to set up telepractice. SLTs also reported increased confidence in providing telepractice, which was reflected in their willingness to continue to provide telepractice even after the pandemic ends. Conclusions & Implications: The increase in use of telepractice during this pandemic is likely to be sustained as a majority of respondents believed they would continue to provide this mode of service delivery even after the pandemic ends. However, clinicians will still have to assess for client suitability, as clients with more complex medical or behavioural issues may still require in‐person therapy. Additionally, dysphagia management via telepractice will still be limited given that swallow presentations may be more variable. Lastly, although generic resources are helpful for clinicians, the long‐term sustainability of telepractice can be boosted by the sharing of resources that are suitable for the local context. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Current studies have examined telepractice use and perspectives of SLTs before and during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Despite the evidence for the efficacy of telepractice, uptake was low due to perceived lack of training and resources. Although more clinicians provided telepractice during the pandemic, many still doubted its efficacy over in‐person therapy and most studies concluded that longer term studies are required to ascertain if SLTs will continuing providing telepractice after the pandemic. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study shows that there is a definitive shift in perspectives in favour of telepractice after the pandemic, as clinicians continued to provide telepractice across most service areas even without lockdown restrictions. The previous challenges of insufficient resources, knowledge and privacy concerns were reduced with more experience in providing telepractice. Although client suitability remained a major barrier, more clinicians saw benefits of easy access to therapy and range of resources used as benefits that they could harness from telepractice. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: A majority of respondents stated that they are more confident in providing telepractice and would want to continue providing this service delivery mode after the pandemic, so more training and resources suitable for the local contexts can be provided by national associations to sustain this. More research and resources can be gathered to make telepractice more efficacious for dysphagia management and clients who may be deemed unsuitable for telepractice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Developmental language disorder (DLD) is a condition which affects an individual's ability to use and understand language. Terminological confusion, and the use of non‐evidence‐based diagnostic criteria has impacted access to services for this population for several decades. Changes in terminology and diagnosis were proposed as part of a UK‐based consensus study, Criteria and Terminology Applied to Language Impairments (CATALISE), in 2016 and 2017. Since the publication of the recommendations, there have been active efforts across several English‐speaking countries to support uptake of these recommendations into policy and practice. Aims: The aim of the study was to explore the experiences of individuals who have been leading the dissemination of the CATALISE recommendations since their publication in 2017. The study was undertaken to inform future implementation efforts aimed at facilitating the adoption of the recommendations into policy and practice. Methods & Procedures: Researchers, practitioners and parents from nine countries were recruited to the study (n = 27). Online focus groups and semi‐structured interviews were conducted using topic guides informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken. Preliminary findings were member‐checked prior to completion of the analysis. Outcomes & Results: CATALISE recommendations were described as partially adopted by participants. Dissemination strategies included building a coalition, conducting educational meetings, and developing educational materials. Common barriers to implementation related to the complexity and compatibility of the recommendations, and practitioner confidence. Four themes were identified across the data set to guide future implementation efforts: (a) ride the wave, craft the narrative (b) reach across the divide, be brave (c) create space for multiple voices and, (d) support for speech and language therapistss on the front line. Conclusions & Implications: Individuals with DLD and their families should be included in future implementation planning. Engaged leadership is essential to address issues of complexity, compatibility, sustainability and practitioner confidence if CATALISE recommendations are to be integrated into service workflow and processes. Implementation science can provide a useful lens to progress future research in this area. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Dissemination efforts have been undertaken to facilitate the uptake of recommendations from a UK‐based consensus study (CATALISE) in relation to developmental language disorder since publication across several countries. What this study adds to existing knowledge: The required changes in diagnostic practice are complex to implement. A lack of compatibility with healthcare processes and low practitioner self‐efficacy were also identified as a challenge to implementation. What are the potential or actual clinical observations of this work?: Parents and individuals with developmental language disorder need to be engaged as partners in future implementation planning. Organisational leaders need to facilitate the contextual integration of the changes within service systems. Speech and language therapists require ongoing case‐based opportunities to enhance their confidence and clinical reasoning skills to implement CATALISE recommendations successfully in their everyday practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: After total laryngectomy, surgical voice restoration is used to establish communication via tracheoesophageal voice prosthesis. Once voice is established, there is a paucity of information on what speech and language therapists (SLTs) should do to improve tracheoesophageal voice quality to ensure functional communication. No existing surveys or studies investigate this specific question. There is also a disconnect between guidelines, knowledge and clinical practice, whereby clinical guidelines stipulate the requirement for SLT intervention, but do not detail what this entails in the rehabilitation context. Aims: (1) To advance understanding of current clinical practice beyond voice prosthesis management and care. (2) To explore what approaches are implemented in clinical practice across the UK and Republic of Ireland to rehabilitate tracheoesophageal voice. (3) To investigate the barriers and facilitators to provision of tracheoesophageal voice therapy. Methods & Procedures: A self‐administered 10‐min online survey was developed using Qualtrics software and piloted before dissemination. Survey development was informed by the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify barriers, facilitators and additional factors contributing to SLTs' provision of voice therapy to tracheoesophageal speakers. The survey was disseminated via social media and professional networks. Eligibility criteria included SLTs with at least one year post‐registration experience and with experience of working with laryngectomy in the past 5 years. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse closed answer questions. Open question responses were analysed using content analysis. Outcomes & Results: The survey received 147 responses. Participants were representative of the head and neck cancer SLT workforce. SLTs believe that tracheoesophageal voice therapy is an important aspect of laryngectomy rehabilitation; however, there was a lack of knowledge about therapy approaches and insufficient resources for implementing therapy. SLTs expressed a desire for more training, specific guidelines and a stronger evidence base to inform clinical practice. Some SLTs expressed feelings of frustration and lack of acknowledgement for the specialist skills required to undertake laryngectomy rehabilitation and tracheoesophageal work in general. Conclusions & Implications: The survey identifies the need for a robust training approach and detailed clinical guidelines to promote consistent practice across the profession. The evidence base within this clinical area is emergent, hence there is a need for increased research and clinical audit to inform practice. Under‐resourcing was highlighted, which should be considered in service planning to ensure that adequate staff, access to expert practitioners or time ring‐fenced for therapy are available for tracheoesophageal speakers to receive the support they require. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Total laryngectomy results in life‐altering changes to communication. Clinical guidelines advocate for speech and language therapy intervention; however, there is no clear information on what SLTs should do to optimize tracheoesophageal voice and the evidence base to support practice is lacking. What this study adds to existing knowledge: This survey identifies what interventions SLTs provide in clinical practice to rehabilitate tracheoesophageal voice; and it explores the barriers and facilitators that influence the provision of tracheoesophageal voice therapy. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Specific training, clinical guidelines, increased research and audit are required to support clinical practice in laryngectomy rehabilitation. Service planning should address the under‐resourcing of staff, expert practitioners and therapy allocated time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Assessing the speech production of multilingual children is challenging for speech‐language therapists (SLTs) around the world. Scientific recommendations to improve clinical practice are available, but their implementation has mostly been described in studies from English‐speaking countries. Aims: This survey aimed to describe the perspectives and practices of SLTs in assessing the speech production of multilingual children in French‐speaking Belgium. Methods & Procedures: An online survey was completed by 134 SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium. Outcomes & Results: SLTs predominantly used norm‐referenced assessment approaches, which are not recommended for use with multilingual children, and lacked necessary training and resources to implement recommended practices in the assessment of speech production of multilingual children. The shift towards more appropriate practices with multilingual children seems to be in its infancy among SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium. Some challenges identified by the SLTs were common to those in other countries and languages, such as the difficulty to distinguish between speech differences and speech disorders. Other challenges were specific to the French language and/or the Belgian context, such as the lack of appropriate tools in French. Conclusions & Implications: Action is required to improve clinical practice in assessing the speech production of multilingual children in French‐speaking contexts: better training for SLTs regarding linguistic diversity, more implementation research in the field of SLT, and advocacy for linguistic diversity with decision makers. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Existing research indicates that assessing the speech production of multilingual children is challenging for speech‐language therapists (SLTs). Scientific recommendations for best practices have been published, and the shift to more appropriate assessment practices may be progressing differently across countries. SLTs' practices have been described in surveys, mostly conducted in English‐speaking countries. Although French is the fifth most spoken language in the world, data about SLTs' perspectives and practices in French‐speaking regions are scarce. What this study adds: The implementation of recommended practices in assessing multilingual children's speech production was limited among SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium. The norm‐referenced approach to assessment was predominant and few SLTs used recommended practices (e.g., criterion‐referenced measures, dynamic assessment, assessment of the child's speech production in the home language). Some challenges were identified that related specifically to practices in French‐speaking contexts (e.g., lack of French tools) and Belgian context (e.g., health policies unfavourable to multilingualism). These findings confirm that specific understanding of a situation is needed to develop context‐ and/or language‐specific solutions—and ultimately improve clinical practice. What are the clinical implications of this work?: SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium require specific training and support to provide appropriate assessment of speech production in multilingual children. Efforts to improve practices in French‐speaking contexts should focus on increasing understanding and consideration of cultural and linguistic diversity at all levels of the child's environment. Evidence‐based knowledge, assessment tools and multilingual resources are available to SLTs on websites in French and in English. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acquired laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS) is a rare condition that causes breathlessness and dyspnoea. Patients have reconstructive airway surgery to improve their breathing difficulties, but both LTS and the surgery can cause voice difficulties. The existing evidence base for management of voice difficulties for adults with LTS focuses on symptoms. There is limited information to provide clinical guidance for speech and language therapists (SLTs) and a limited understanding of the impact of voice changes on adults with LTS. Aim: To investigate the lived experience of adults with laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS), who have had reconstructive surgery; here focussing on voice concerns with the aim of guiding clinical care for SLTs. Methods and Procedures: A phenomenological, qualitative study design was used. Focus groups and semi‐structured interviews were completed with adults living with LTS who had had reconstructive surgery. Audio recordings were transcribed and inductive thematic analysis was used by the research team to identify themes and sub‐themes. Outcomes and Results: A total of 24 participants (five focus groups and two interviews) took part in the study before thematic saturation was identified in analysis. Three main themes were identified specific to the experience of living with LTS: the Medical, Physical and Emotional journey. All participants referenced voice difficulties as they related to each of these overall themes. Sub‐themes directly related to voice included experience of surgery, information provision, staff expertise/complacency, symptoms, symptom management, identity, support networks, impact on life and living with a chronic condition. Conclusions and Implications: In this qualitative study participants have described the integral part voice difficulties play in their lived experience of LTS and reconstructive surgery. This is considered in the context of their clinical care and the need for individualised management and information provision throughout the course of their condition. The broader research literature relating to voice difficulties is explored with links made to people with LTS and recommendations made for future research into people living with LTS and dysphonia. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Adults with laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS) experience voice changes as a result of their condition, and the surgeries necessary as a treatment. These changes can lead to altered pitch, vocal fatigue, loss of pitch range and loss of volume control. Although there are known psychosocial implications both to living with a chronic condition and voice difficulties there has been no research exploring this in adults with LTS, and there is minimal clinical guidance for speech and language therapists (SLTs) working with these patients. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This research is the first study to explore the lived experience of adults with LTS who undergo reconstructive surgery, focusing on their voice concerns. This study demonstrates the multifactorial impacts of voice changes on all aspects of the lives of adults with LTS and the need for individualised information provision and clinical care to help support them. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Adults with LTS want expert SLTs to facilitate their care and support them throughout their LTS journey alongside other support networks. They want to be carefully prepared for reconstructive surgery and given clear information about symptoms and management of their voice difficulties. This has led to the reorganisation of the care pathway at our centre, and the introduction of a patient‐led pretreatment session. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Online knowledge translation (KT) approaches are becoming increasingly prevalent within healthcare due to their accessibility and facilitation of international support networks. Online platforms enable timely and far‐reaching dissemination of current evidence and best‐practice recommendations. Although there is potential to improve the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines, it is essential to consider the acceptability of online approaches to healthcare professionals to ensure their successful integration within everyday clinical settings. Aims: To establish the prospective acceptability of a theoretically informed online intervention for speech pathologists, Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice, that aims to facilitate the implementation of aphasia best practice. Methods & Procedures: A mixed‐methods multinational electronic survey based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) completed by aphasia researchers and clinicians. Outcomes & Results: A total of 43 participants completed the survey with 91% (n = 39) indicating that they would use Aphasia Nexus. Understanding the intervention and how it works (intervention coherence as per the TFA) was the key factor influencing the likelihood of integration within everyday clinical practice. Participants identified potential areas where the intervention could influence service change and also recommended further design and content changes to improve the intervention. Conclusions & Implications: Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable platform for further feasibility testing in the form of a pilot trial within an Australian‐based health service. The study progresses the theory of TFA as it was a valuable framework facilitating the identification of prominent factors influencing acceptability. The study also informs further intervention refinements in preparation for the next stage of research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Online strategies have the potential to enhance KT and promote the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines. An online intervention, however, can only be effective if implemented well. For this reason, it is essential to establish the acceptability of online interventions to the intended recipients and therefore increase the likelihood of successful implementation. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study used a theoretically based framework to establish the acceptability of an online implementation intervention, Aphasia Nexus, to multinational aphasia clinicians and researchers. It demonstrated the value in identifying the prominent factors influencing acceptability to inform further intervention refinements and warrant continuing research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Speech pathologists should use online platforms to drive the implementation of best practice on an international scale. It is important for clinicians to have an in‐depth understanding of online interventions and how they work to enhance their successful uptake into routine clinical practice. Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable online platform for implementing best practice in aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Improving the quality of life for individuals with severe dysphagia is a priority when considering new areas of dysphagia management, especially if this increases opportunities to participate in social activities associated with eating and drinking. Edible foam is widely researched and available in the food industry; however, the use of edible foam within the field of dysphagia remains unexplored. Despite no research published on effectiveness and safety, a commercial product currently on the market is widely distributed across both Europe and the UK, including 28 NHS Trusts, suggesting that it is increasingly being used in clinical practice. Aims: To explore the perceptions and experiences of healthcare professionals on the use of stabilized edible foam (SEF) with adults with severe dysphagia in order to inform areas for future research in this novel dysphagia intervention. Methods & Procedures: Healthcare professionals were recruited using purposeful sampling and snowballing technique. A total of 56 healthcare professionals were initially approached, of which 10 completed the semi‐structured interviews. Interview questions were developed from a topic guide and a pilot questionnaire. Outcomes & Results: Thematic analysis was used to identify three themes: potential impact, consideration of risk and perceived experiences. Overarching each of these themes was the element of the unknown. Conclusions & Implications: Use of SEF with adults with dysphagia is in its infancy. Whilst results indicate that some clinicians are embracing this novel approach, others express concerns. Therefore, further research is needed, particularly in relation of direct experience of individuals and contra‐indications. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: The use of SEF with individuals with swallowing problems is a relatively novel area of dysphagia intervention in the UK. There are currently no published studies on its effectiveness and safety profile. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study provides valuable preliminary work into the area of SEF and adults with severe dysphagia, capturing the experience and perceptions of healthcare professions who have an awareness of SEF. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Increasing clinicians and researcher's awareness of this novel area of dysphagia management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: At least 25% of autistic children worldwide have the potential to grow up in a bilingual environment. However, many autistic children are being denied opportunities to access additional languages and the cultural, familial and community connections that come with this. There is little evidence identifying the barriers to language learning and access, and no research addressing the perspectives of speech and language therapists (SLTs), who are crucial in supporting parents to make informed choices about bilingualism with their child. Aims: The aim of this research was to understand the experiences of SLTs working with autistic bilingual children, to understand the main considerations when working with families, and the opportunities and barriers for training, including the sources of information that current practice is based on. Methods and Procedures: Twelve SLTs from across the United Kingdom were recruited for this study. All participants were experienced in working with autistic bilingual children and their families (M = 7 years, range 4–23 years). Semi‐structured interviews were conducted and focused on the experiences of SLTs regarding familial bilingual experiences, the effect of sociocultural factors of practice, and the extent to which practice is based on current research. Outcomes and Results: Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Three central themes were identified from the interviews: (1) participants discussed parental uncertainties as to whether they were doing the right thing for their child, (2) while participants were in support of bilingualism, they were not always confident that they were providing the right advice and found it difficult to in keep up to date with relevant, evidence‐based research, and (3) participants highlighted a need to shift towards a more inclusive and culturally diverse practice. Conclusions and Implications: This is the first qualitative study to understand the perspectives of SLTs working with autistic bilingual children. We identify several key difficulties in supporting access to language learning, and these findings have immediate and longer‐term implications for supporting SLTs, and in turn, the children and families they support. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Research suggests that autistic children currently have fewer opportunities to maintain bilingualism compared to neurotypical peers. Despite the lack of evidence, many families remain concerned that bilingualism will have a negative impact on their child's development. To date, little is known about the perspectives of speech and language therapists (SLTs) who play a significant role in supporting the development of autistic bilingual children. This is the first study to provide an in‐depth qualitative analysis of the experiences of SLTs working with autistic bilingual children and their families in the United Kingdom. What this study adds: The results highlight a number of reoccurring barriers in providing optimal support: first, frequently cited concerns about bilingualism from parents that link to a lack of understanding about autism and the role of SLTs more generally. Second, SLTs do not have confidence in the assessments and tools available and described a lack of emphasis on cultural factors in practice. Many SLTs were concerned about the limited options for resources and interventions available in other languages, which could be challenging for parents who were less proficient or confident communicating in English. Third, SLTs reported having limited opportunities to keep up to date with relevant research to support their decision‐making processes. What are the clinical implications of this work?: These results have several important implications for practice—they highlight the need for more inclusive practices where possible, a need for more diversity within the profession and further opportunities to be provided with evidence‐based advice around good practice. The results also suggest a benefit of providing accessible, evidence‐based resources for parents about autism and bilingualism, to ensure that research key findings are reaching families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Aphasia can affect the communication between the person with aphasia (PWA) and the communication partner (CP). It is therefore necessary to support both the PWA and their CPs. Communication partner training (CPT) focuses on training communication between dyads of whom one person has aphasia. Although there is increasing evidence supporting CPT as an effective intervention to improve communication and reduce the psychosocial consequences of stroke, implementation in clinical practice remains limited. Aim: To understand the mechanisms behind the practice–evidence gap currently hindering CPT implementation, this study investigated the role of (1) education, (2) concept knowledge, (3) work setting and (4) clinical experience in CPT. Methods & Procedures: Flemish speech and language therapists (SLTs) clinically involved in aphasia rehabilitation were surveyed online regarding CPT. Statistical analyses include descriptive statistics to report survey results and non‐parametric group comparisons to investigate the role of the four variables on CPT. Outcomes & Results: In this study 72 SLTs were included, of whom 73.61% indicated they deliver CPT but of whom only 43.10% indicated CP presence during therapy. The most frequently identified barriers to CPT delivery were lack of time and CPT‐specific knowledge. Other barriers were lack of resources, work setting dependent factors, PWA or CP dependent factors, individual therapy to the PWA being of higher priority, existing CPT methods and interventions being perceived as unclear and feeling uncertain about CPT delivery. Concerning the role of the four variables on CPT delivery, neither education nor concept knowledge had a significant effect on CPT delivery. Work setting and clinical experience did, however, influence CPT delivery. More specifically, CPT delivery and CP presence were higher in the private practice (chronic phase) compared to the other three settings and experienced SLTs deliver CPT more often compared with less experienced SLTs. Conclusions & Implications: To reduce the practice–evidence gap, we suggest prioritising the two most frequently identified barriers, that is, lack of time and CPT‐specific knowledge. To overcome the time barrier in CPT, we propose implementing automated natural speech analysis to reduce the workload. To enhance CPT‐specific knowledge, speech and language therapy curricula should provide more in‐depth theory and hands‐on practice for CPT. In addition, increased awareness about CPT‐specific methods is needed to further support clinical practice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Communication partner training (CPT) is an effective intervention to improve communication and reduce the psychosocial consequences of stroke. Despite this evidence base, a current practice–evidence gap exists. What this study adds: This is the first study to characterise CPT delivery in a Flemish cohort of speech and language therapists (SLTs). In addition, on a more international perspective, few studies have investigated the role of education, concept knowledge, work setting and clinical experience in CPT. We found that neither education nor concept knowledge has a significant effect on CPT delivery. CPT delivery and communication partner presence are significantly higher in the private practice compared to the hospital, rehabilitation centre or nursing home settings. Experienced SLTs deliver CPT more often compared with less‐experienced SLTs. The two most prominent reported barriers include lack of time and CPT‐specific knowledge. What are the clinical implications of this work?: This study suggests reducing the practice–evidence gap by alleviating the main barriers identified, that is, lack of time and CPT‐specific knowledge. Time‐barriers can be addressed by implementing automated natural speech analyses. We additionally advocate for more in‐depth theory and hands‐on practice for CPT in speech and language therapy curricula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research evidence suggests aphasia therapy must be delivered at high intensity to effect change. Comprehensive therapy, addressing all domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, is also called for by people with aphasia and their families. However, aphasia therapy is rarely intense or comprehensive. Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes (ICAPs) were designed to address this challenge, but such programmes are not widely implemented. Aims: This study surveyed the views of UK‐based speech and language therapists (SLTs) regarding intensive and comprehensive aphasia therapy. It explored definitions of intensive and comprehensive therapy, patterns of provision, views about candidacy and barriers/facilitators. It also investigated awareness of ICAPs and perceived potential of this service model. Differences across UK regions and workplace settings were explored. Methods & Procedures: An e‐survey ran for 5 months. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative free text comments were analysed using content analysis. Outcomes & Results: Two hundred twenty‐seven respondents engaged in the e‐survey. Definitions of intensive aphasia therapy did not reach UK clinical guideline/research‐level thresholds for most of the sample. Those providing more therapy provided definitions with higher standards of intensity. Mean therapy delivered was 128 min/week. Geographical location and workplace setting influenced the amount of therapy delivered. The most frequently delivered therapy approaches were functional language therapy and impairment‐based therapy. Cognitive disability and fatigue were concerns for therapy candidacy. Barriers included lack of resources and low levels of optimism that issues could be solved. 50% of respondents were aware of ICAPs and 15 had been involved in ICAP provision. Only 16.5% felt their service could be reconfigured to deliver an ICAP. Conclusions & Implications: This e‐survey evidences a mismatch between an SLT's concept of intensity and that espoused by clinical guidelines/research. Geographical variations in intensity are concerning. Although a wide range of therapy approaches are offered, certain aphasia therapies are delivered more frequently. Awareness of ICAPs was relatively high, but few respondents had experience of this model or felt it could be executed in their context. Further initiatives are needed if services are to move from a low‐dose or non‐comprehensive model of delivery. Such initiatives might include but not be confined to wider uptake of ICAPs. Pragmatic research might also explore which treatments are efficacious with a low‐dose model of delivery, given that this model is dominant in the United Kingdom. These clinical and research implications are raised in the discussion. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: There is a gap between the high intensity of aphasia treatment provided in research versus mainstream clinical settings. A lower standard of 45 min/day set by UK clinical guidelines is also not achieved. Although speech and language therapists (SLTs) provide a wide range of therapies, they typically focus on impairment‐based approaches. What this study adds: This is the first survey of UK SLTs asking about their concept of intensity in aphasia therapy and what types of aphasia therapy they provide. It explores geographical and workplace variations and barriers and facilitators to aphasia therapy provision. It investigates Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes (ICAPs) in a UK context. What are the clinical implications of this work?: There are barriers to the provision of intensive and comprehensive therapy in the United Kingdom and reservations about the feasibility of ICAPs in a mainstream UK context. However, there are also facilitators to aphasia therapy provision and evidence that a small proportion of UK SLTs are providing intensive/comprehensive aphasia therapy). Dissemination of good practice is necessary and suggestions for increasing intensity of service provision are listed in the discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Face‐to‐face class suspensions during the coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic in 2019 increased telepractice in speech and language therapy. However, little is known about speech and language therapists' (SLTs) perceived effectiveness of telepractice and its antecedents. Aims: To examine the use of telepractice and the factors affecting its perceived effectiveness in Hong Kong mainstream schools during COVID‐19. Methods & Procedures: Seventy‐two school‐based Hong Kong SLTs completed a 110‐item online survey with six structural components: (1) concerns, (2) adoption, (3) student selection criteria, (4) perceived effectiveness, (5) continuous professional development and (6) attitudes/beliefs. Outcomes & Results: Over 90% of respondents adopted telepractice during the pandemic. Confirmatory factor analysis identified reliable constructs from their component measures. These participants reported great telepractice difficulties (especially in therapy preparation and managing students' attention and/or communication). Mixed‐response analysis revealed that psychosocial factors (i.e., students' engagement and SLTs' attitudes towards telepractice) but not professional practice skill factors (i.e., student client selection criteria and SLTs' years of experience in school settings) contributed to SLTs' self‐perceived effectiveness of telepractice. Conclusions & Implications: Our findings suggest that psychosocial factors play a more important role than professional practice skill factors in the self‐perceived effectiveness of telepractice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Previous surveys reported that although SLTs were interested in using telepractice before the COVID‐19 pandemic, they showed concern about its effectiveness, resulting in a low adoption rate. One critical question naturally arises: What factors may affect the perceived effectiveness of telepractice by SLTs? What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study demonstrates for the first time that despite the high adoption rate of telepractice during the COVID‐19 pandemic, school‐based SLTs exhibited great difficulties, and the SLTs' self‐perceived effectiveness of telepractice was related to psychosocial factors instead of professional practice skill factors. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work: Professional support is needed to alter the attitudes of SLTs towards telepractice for enhancing their self‐perceived effectiveness and positive clinical practice experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While the relationship between speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) and mental health difficulties has been recognized, speech and language therapists (SLTs), and mental health professionals face challenges in assessing and treating children with these co‐occurring needs. There exists a gap in the evidence base for best practice for professionals working with children and young people (CYP) who experience difficulties in both areas. Aims: To explore the views of SLTs and mental health clinicians about their experiences of working with CYP exhibiting co‐occurring SLCN and mental health difficulties. Methods & Procedures: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with eight SLTs and six mental health professionals, including psychotherapists, clinical psychologists, play therapists and counsellors, with experience working with CYP with SLCN. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and themes were identified from the data. Outcomes & Results: Participants felt that SLCN and mental health difficulties frequently co‐occur. Participants described how CYP with SLCN and mental health issues commonly experience difficulties across and between the domains of language and cognition, emotional well‐being and challenging behaviour. Findings suggest that there are organizational limitations in the fields of SLT and mental health that have implications for the efficacy of assessment and treatment of CYP with SLCN and mental health difficulties. Traditional talking therapies were perceived to be inaccessible and ineffective for CYP with SLCN and mental health difficulties. Interventions blending behaviour and emotion programmes with language and communication interventions were considered potentially beneficial. Conclusions & Implications: Future research should explore and evaluate current services and service set‐up in SLT and mental health. The findings from this study have important implications for the efficacy of treatments provided to this population suggesting that more research needs to be done into effective diagnosis and interventions for this population. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Research suggests that CYP with SLCN, such as developmental language disorder (DLD), are likely to experience mental health difficulties including depression, anxiety and poor emotional well‐being. CYP who experience difficulties with SLCN and poor mental health are not well understood and this area remains under‐researched. This has implications for clinician knowledge and therefore the effective diagnosis and treatment of children and adolescents experiencing SLCN and mental health difficulties. In addition, little is known about the accessibility of talking therapies to CYP presenting with SLCN and mental health difficulties. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: SLCN issues are understood by SLTs and mental health issues are understood by mental health professionals, but where these co‐occur difficulties exist for the diagnostic process, with professionals perceiving that CYP in this category are often undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. Organizational boundaries between SLT and mental health were perceived to contribute to a lack of understanding of SLCN and mental health needs, which has implications for effective diagnosis and treatment. Traditional talking therapies were thought to be inaccessible for CYP with SLCN and mental health difficulties. Interventions used in both SLT and psychotherapy were perceived as clinically useful if combined. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This paper highlights implications for the accessibility and efficacy of the assessment and treatment provided to this population and to the organization of services currently treating this group of CYP. A direction for future research would be to undertake service evaluations and intervention‐based studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There has been a significant uptake in the use of telepractice during the coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 (COVID‐19) pandemic. This study explored the experiences of speech and language therapists (SLTs), assistants (SLTAs) and parents with telepractice during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Aims: (1) To identify factors that influenced success of telepractice; and (2) to describe clinicians' and parents' preferences for the future mode of service delivery for preschoolers with communication disorders. Methods & Procedures: The study was conducted in partnership with one publicly funded programme in Ontario, Canada, that offered services to preschoolers with speech, language and communication needs at no cost. SLTs (N = 13), assistants (N = 3) and parents (N = 13) shared their experiences and perspectives during semi‐structured videoconference interviews. Outcomes & Results: Factors that influenced the success of telepractice were reported in three categories: the setting (i.e., where and how telepractice was being delivered); the nature of telepractice (i.e., the services that were provided via telepractice); and the individuals (i.e., who was involved in telepractice). These factors were reported to interact with each other. As the needs for each child and family are unique, parents and clinicians reported a preference for a hybrid and flexible service delivery model in the future. Conclusions & Implications: The themes identified in this study can be used by clinicians and managers to consider factors that influence the success of telepractice for children and families. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject?: Studies conducted before the COVID‐19 pandemic showed that telepractice was an effective and acceptable service approach. However, some clinicians and parents reported wanting to resume in‐person visits. The provision of telepractice services to families with children with communication disorders increased significantly during COVID‐19. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: Parents and clinicians shared factors that influenced the success of telepractice during semi‐structured interviews. Factors were identified in three categories: the setting (i.e., where and how telepractice was being delivered); the nature of telepractice (i.e., the services that were provided via telepractice); and the individuals (i.e., who were involved in telepractice). As each child's and family's needs are unique, parents and clinicians reported a preference for a hybrid and flexible service delivery model in the future. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: SLTs and SLT managers can use the factors identified to discuss with parents and decide whether telepractice may be well suited to the needs of each child and family. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bridging the research–practice gap in autism communication services is an identified priority for improving services. Limited research has investigated the views of practitioners regarding this research–practice gap. Investigation of the barriers experienced and facilitators used in clinical practice may assist to identify scalable and sustainable strategies to increase use of evidence‐based practices (EBPs) in the delivery of communication services to children with autism. Aims: To elucidate how Australian speech pathologists engage with external evidence and how communication outcomes are measured to demonstrate the effectiveness of service provision to children with autism. Methods & Procedures: A total of 15 Australian speech pathologists, with experience ranging from less than 1 to more than 16 years, participated in three focus groups. Data from focus groups were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis within an interpretive phenomenological paradigm. Outcomes & Results: Seven themes were identified. Participants reported on the diversity of individuals with autism, their experiences of resource constraints, seeking collegial advice and accessing a diverse range of evidence sources, the role of clinical expertise in translating evidence to practice, the barriers experienced in outcome measurement and use of stakeholders to facilitate data collection to demonstrate outcomes. Conclusions & Implications: Individual practitioner skill and beliefs are facilitators to translating research to practice. Interventions to improve clinician use of EBP should address the skill and belief barriers, aiming to increase a clinician's EBP self‐efficacy and increasing their expectation that investing in EBP activities will result in improved services for children with autism. Modelling and reflective practice are two strategies that may have an application as interventions to improve EBP use in clinical practice. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Constrained resources, especially lack of time, is a barrier to routine uptake of best available evidence in clinical services for children with autism. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: In this study, the perception that speech pathologists lacked time to engage in EBP activities was linked with the speech pathologist's research skill and their beliefs about the benefits of engaging in EBP. Speech Pathologists reported using a range of information sources, as "evidence" but also reported feeling uneasy when using evidence of disputable, or unknown quality. Accessibility and relevance to their individual client were highly prioritised in selecting evidence. Clinical expertise was an essential skill for research translation. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Interventions which target professional beliefs and research translation capability are requisite for motivating speech pathologists to improve their use of EBP.Modelling of EBP use, individual reflective practice and collegial active listening to facilitate reflective practice, might be useful strategies which target beliefs and capability of individual speech pathologists; thereby changing their EBP use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Phonetic transcription is recognized in regulatory standards as an essential skill for Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs) in the assessment, diagnosis and management of clients with speech difficulties. Previous research has identified that approaches to phonetic transcription vary, and that SLTs often lack confidence in transcribing. However, SLTs' views and working practices have not been investigated in detail, particularly in terms of whole service approaches and following the recent increase in telehealth. Aims: To investigate SLTs' views about phonetic transcription, their working practices at both individual and service levels, and the factors that influence these. Methods & Procedures: A total of 19 SLTs from the UK were recruited to online focus groups via social media and local networks. Participants discussed their views of, and practices in, phonetic transcription. Themes were identified using reflexive thematic analysis. Outcomes & Results: Three broad themes were generated division and unity; one small part of a big job; and fit for purpose. SLTs were uniformly proud of their ability to phonetically transcribe and viewed this as a unique skill, but clear differences existed between different groups of SLTs in their views and practices. Investing in phonetic transcription was not always a priority for SLTs or services, and although many felt under‐confident in their skills they considered these to be adequate for the populations they usually encounter. SLTs make an early judgement about possible therapy targets, which influences the level of detail used in their phonetic transcription. Practical barriers are often not addressed at service level, and assessment via telehealth poses some specific challenges. Conclusions & Implications: SLTs and services would benefit from increased investment in phonetic transcription in terms of time, opportunities for continuing professional development (CPD) and initiatives such as electronic patient records (EPRs) which support the use of phonetic symbols. Identifying target sounds at an early stage raises questions about the implications of disregarding other features of speech, and the selection of appropriate intervention approaches. Further research is needed to analyse actual rather than reported practices, and to consider the relationship between phonetic transcription and intervention approaches. Future studies could also identify precise CPD requirements and evaluate the effectiveness of CPD. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Previous research has demonstrated that SLTs often lack confidence in phonetic transcription and that practices are varied, with relatively little use of narrow transcription. SLTs are interested in opportunities to maintain and develop transcription skills but do not often undertake CPD for transcription. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: By using focus groups as a forum for discussions, this study provides a rich and detailed insight into SLTs' views about clinical transcription and their working practices, with previously unreported details about the reasons for these practices in a clinical context and at a service‐wide level. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Transcription is often de‐prioritized in non‐specialist contexts, with practical barriers and a lack of clear and consistent protocols at a whole‐service level. There is an opportunity for service managers to address the systemic difficulties in using transcription effectively by raising the profile and value of transcription amongst clinicians, and promoting CPD opportunities, using the findings of this study as a rationale for funding this. Together, these recommendations have the potential to improve client outcomes through more accurate assessment and diagnosis, and hence more appropriate intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech and language therapists and nurses need to work together to keep patients with swallowing difficulties safe throughout their acute stroke admission. Speech and language therapists make recommendations for safe swallowing following assessment and nurses put recommendations into practice and monitor how patients cope. There has been little research into the everyday realities of ongoing swallow safety management by these two disciplines. Patient safety research in other fields of healthcare indicates that safety can be enhanced through understanding the cultural context in which risk decisions are made. Aims: To generate new understanding for how speech and language therapists (SLTs) and nurses share information for ongoing management of swallows safety on stroke units. Methods & Procedures: An ethnographic methodology involving 40 weeks of fieldwork on three stroke wards in England between 2015 and 2017. Fieldwork observation (357 h) and interviews with 43 members of SLT and nursing staff. Observational and interview data were analysed iteratively using techniques from the constant comparative method to create a thematically organized explanation. Outcomes & Results: An explanation for how disciplinary differences in time and space influenced how SLT and nursing staff shared information for ongoing management of swallow safety, based around three themes: (1) SLTs and nurses were aligned in concern for swallow safety across all information‐sharing routes; however, (2) ambiguity was introduced by the need for the information contained in swallowing recommendations to travel across time, creating dilemmas for nurses. Patients could improve or deteriorate after recommendations were made and nurses had competing demands on their time. Ambiguity had consequences for (3) critical incident reporting and relationships. SLTs experienced dilemmas over how to act when recommendations were not followed. Conclusions & Implications: This study provides new understanding for patient safety dilemmas associated with the enactment and oversight of swallowing recommendations in context, on stroke wards. Findings can support SLTs and nurses to explore together how information for ongoing dysphagia management can be safely implemented within ward realities and kept up to date. This could include considering nursing capacity to act when SLTs are not there, mealtime staffing and SLT 7‐day working. Together they can review their understanding of risk and preferred local and formal routes for learning from it. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: It is known that information to keep swallowing safe is shared through swallowing recommendations, which are understood to involve a balance of risks between optimizing the safety of the swallow mechanism and maintaining physiological and emotional health. There is increasing appreciation from patient safety research, of the importance of understanding the context in which hospital staff make decisions about risk and patient safety. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: The paper provides new empirical understanding for the complexities of risk management associated with SLT and nursing interactions and roles with respect to ongoing swallow safety. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Findings can underpin SLT and nurse discussion about how swallow safety could be improved in their own settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Face mask use has become widespread as a means of reducing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). Research suggests face coverings can impact speech discrimination, therapeutic alliance and the interpretation of non‐verbal cues. However, there is little research into the impact of face masks on people with communication difficulties (pwCD) post‐stroke. Aims: To explore the perspectives of service users and staff on a stroke rehabilitation unit in order to understand the impact of staff wearing face masks on the experience of rehabilitation for pwCD. Strategies that might improve the experience of rehabilitation for pwCD were also explored. Methods & Procedures: Semi‐structured interviews and a focus group were conducted with six pwCD and five health professionals (HPs) on a stroke rehabilitation unit. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Outcomes & Results: Four main interacting themes were identified from the data: (1) face masks as a barrier to effective communication; (2) face masks as a barrier to human connection and therapeutic relationships; (3) the impact of face masks on an individual is influenced by multiple internal and external factors; and (4) there is a need for service provision to evolve to meet pwCD's needs when using face masks. Conclusions & Implications: Findings shed light on how face masks can act as a barrier for pwCD within the rehabilitative process, and emphasize that each individual with communication difficulties is likely to be affected to a differing extent, as a result of multiple interacting factors. HPs are encouraged to consider the individual holistically, tailor strategies and adapt to each individual's needs. Further research is required to understand how to optimize rehabilitation outcomes when face masks are used. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: There is evidence face masks can affect speech discrimination, therapeutic alliance and interpretation of non‐verbal cues. The existing literature predominantly considers people with hearing impairments, mental health needs or the general public. The potential for face masks to impact pwCD post‐stroke is high, given pre‐existing communication barriers and evidence of increased social isolation. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study is the first of its kind to explore how face mask use by HPs impacts the experience of rehabilitation for pwCD post‐stroke. The authors consider the need to tailor compensatory strategies to each individual and adapt them to meet service users' needs. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: HPs should monitor closely the impact of face mask use on pwCD with whom they are working, and consider what adaptations to delivery are required. It would be helpful for clinicians to have a discussion with pwCD post‐stroke to understand the impact of face mask use on them personally and what strategies they would find most helpful within rehabilitation. Additional training by speech and language therapists on supporting effective communication and successful interaction with pwCD may be indicated in the context of face mask use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The free water protocol (FWP) is an alternate management strategy for patients with dysphagia, who would otherwise be nil by mouth or prescribed thickened fluids, allowing them to drink and potentially aspirate water under strict guidelines to minimize the risk of adverse consequences. The FWP is not widely implemented in acute settings, and it is unclear whether this is due to the complexity of patient presentations, clinician decision‐making or barriers related to the setting. Aims: To explore the perceptions and decision‐making process of clinicians about using FWPs to manage dysphagia for patients admitted to acute stroke and general medicine. Methods & Procedures: A qualitative, critical realist approach was adopted to allow for in‐depth exploration of the perspectives of four dietitians, seven medical officers, eight registered nurses and 17 speech and language pathologists (SLPs) from three hospitals in a capital city of Australia. Data from semi‐structured interviews were analysed using the Situated Clinical Decision‐Making Framework (CDF). Outcomes & Results: Participants were cautious about FWP for patients with neurological conditions, head and neck cancer, dementia, poor immunity, chronic or recurrent respiratory illness, and certain types of stroke. Medical status and the implications for aspiration were paramount, particularly respiratory status, oxygen supplementation, cognitive status, fatigue and mobility. Participants considered patient quality of life, preferences and choices for care, but indicated that factors influencing safety often outweighed patient preference for water. Indirect factors affecting decision‐making included the roles of the multidisciplinary team, individual clinical experience and attitude to risk, and availability of supervision. Conclusions & Implications: Despite the benefits of FWPs in other settings, in acute stroke and general medicine, clinicians erred on the side of safety and, in most cases, would not implement an FWP. Future clinical research is needed to systematically design high‐quality and feasible clinical trials to determine the benefits and safety of FWPs for patients with dysphagia in these settings. This would lay the foundations for guidelines to support the complex clinical decision‐making regarding patient suitability for FWPs. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: FWPs are an alternate management strategy for patients with dysphagia, with systematic reviews recommending their use for adults in inpatient rehabilitation with a low risk of pneumonia. However, evidence from the acute setting is sparse, leaving clinicians unsure about which patients might benefit and which may inadvertently be exposed to increased risk by an FWP. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Participants from all interviewed disciplines agreed that SLPs lead the decision‐making process and as such act as 'gatekeepers' for access to an FWP. The decision‐making process is complex, and participants acknowledged that disease conditions and illnesses were often used as exclusionary criteria. Although participants reported favourably on the benefits of FWPs, their decision‐making privileged risk aversion over patient preference in most settings, except for palliative care. Lack of clinical guidelines and research evidence in acute care settings, as well as the focus on risk aversion, appear to perpetually reinforce the avoidance of FWP in these settings. Of note, more senior clinicians acknowledged being more deliberately guided by patient preference; hence, leadership by senior clinicians appears critical for change in practice in this space. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: If evidence about the safety of FWP in the acute settings is to be collected, a systematic approach to addressing the present barriers is warranted. This may allow rigorous clinical trials to proceed and potentially lead to best‐practice guidelines for dysphagia management options for wider populations of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech–language therapists and audiologists (SLT&As) may encounter difficulties when confronted with patient death and dying, which may conflict with their moral beliefs and result in moral injury. Furthermore, South African SLT&As practice in a country with a high mortality rate, which may add to the complexity of their experience. Moreover, they may be influenced by African philosophies promoting care, which might conflict with their experiences of patient death and dying. Aims: To explore the moral injury experienced by South African SLT&As in patient death and dying, and how they overcame the injury. Methods & Procedures: This article forms part of a larger qualitative study that explored SLT&As' experiences of patient death and dying in South Africa. Thematic analysis was conducted on the transcripts of 25 episodic narrative interviews conducted with South African SLT&As on their experiences of patient death and dying. Outcomes & Results: Findings suggest that South African SLT&As experienced helplessness, guilt and anger in patient death and dying. However, with support from the allied team, engaging in self‐reflection and religious practices, they reported alleviation of moral injury. Conclusions & Implications: In order to mitigate moral injury in South African SLT&As, they require professional education, self‐care strategies, guidelines and support from the teams in which they work and their supervisors. Research is needed that explores how SLT&As' biographical characteristics and interactions with significant others of dying and deceased patients, may result in moral injury. What this paper adds?: What is already known on this subject?: Moral injury and measures used to overcome the injury have been explored in military personnel, doctors and nurses, but not in SLT&As. However, studies that explored the perceptions of SLTs and/or audiologists regarding providing palliative care and of death and dying, particularly that by Rivers et al. in 2009, suggested that these professionals may be at risk of experiencing emotional trauma due to patient death, particularly when not receiving undergraduate education on this subject. However, the extent of this trauma and the support needed to overcome it is unknown because the participants in these studies may have not experienced patient death, and were only students or just SLTs. What this article adds?: This article highlights the complexity of speech–language therapy and audiology practice when confronted with patient death and dying. South African SLT&As may have to make decisions that conflict with their morals and professional practice standards, especially as the helping nature of their profession is characterized by African philosophies that promote care, which may result in moral injury. Clinical implications of this article: This article indicates that in addition to undergraduate education on patient death and dying, SLTs and audiologists require continuous professional education on this topic, self‐care strategies, support from the teams in which they work, and their supervisors and guidelines for when they encounter patient death and dying. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An increasing number of children in the UK and Ireland are growing up speaking more than one language. The many advantages of bilingualism are acknowledged; however, this increased linguistic diversity presents particular challenges for speech and language therapists (SLTs). The case is often more complex with speakers of minority languages such as Welsh and Irish, which are acquired almost exclusively in bilingual contexts. Lack of appropriate standardized assessments for bilinguals is a key issue for SLTs internationally; however, little is known about the practices, personal perspectives or wider challenges faced by SLTs in assessing minority language skills. We focus on SLTs working with English–Irish bilinguals across Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI) where status, use and exposure to Irish differ significantly. Aims: To investigate the perceptions and practices of SLTs in NI and the ROI in the assessment of bilingual English–Irish‐speaking children. Methods & Procedures: A 33‐item online survey was distributed to SLTs working with children in community settings in NI and the ROI. Outcomes & Results: A total of 181 SLTs completed the survey. The majority of respondents had bilingual English–Irish‐speaking children on their caseloads; however, less than one‐quarter had assessed Irish language skills. Responses indicate confusion as to whether best‐practice guidelines applied in this particular context where the majority of speakers have English as their first language and limited domains of exposure to Irish outside of the education system. Resources available to assess Irish language skills were found to be limited. Informal analysis of language samples emerged as the most popular assessment tool. SLTs in the ROI had a significantly higher level of competence in the Irish language than SLTs in NI. This reduced the challenge of assessment. Many SLTs reported scoring assessments standardized on monolingual populations when assessing English language skills in bilingual English–Irish‐speaking children. Conclusions & Implications: Our findings highlight the challenges faced by SLTs in meeting best‐practice guidelines in the assessment of speakers of minority languages such as Irish. Further work is needed to ensure clinicians and other professionals have access to information and enhanced training on bilingual language acquisition in minority language contexts and implications for assessment and diagnosis. This study underlines the need for further research on the acquisition of minority languages as well as the development of alternative assessment tools to assist SLTs in meeting the needs of this population. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Existing research indicates that SLTs face challenges in assessing bilingual clients. Lack of assessment resources is a global issue, particularly with respect to minority languages. Emerging research indicates that SLTs and other professionals are dissatisfied with current resources for assessing Irish‐speaking bilinguals and are struggling to meet best‐practice guidelines. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: The status of the Irish language differs significantly between NI and the ROI, while English is the dominant language in both areas. This study provides the first exploration of current assessment practices for bilingual English–Irish‐speaking children as reported by SLTs across both regions. The challenges of assessing bilingual clients in many other countries are mirrored by SLTs in NI and the ROI. The majority of children acquiring Irish are doing so in a specific context: the immersion education setting. This raises uncertainty for SLTs about whether the definition of bilingualism actually applies. Despite clinicians and clients sharing the same majority language, the complexity of minority language assessment remains. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: SLTs require specific support and resources to help them meet the assessment needs of bilingual English–Irish‐speaking children. Ongoing education and training are required for clinicians and other professionals to facilitate understanding of the complexities surrounding bilingual speakers of minority languages and the application of best‐practice guidelines. A greater understanding of the context in which children are acquiring Irish and the impact this may have on their acquisition of English would further support clinicians in identifying speech, language and communication needs in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite emerging evidence of validity and reliability, speech and language therapists' (SLT) uptake of telehealth has been limited and barriers remain to the effective and confident use of this service model. The COVID‐19 pandemic has caused significant disruption to essential health services, including speech and language therapy assessment and intervention, meaning that telehealth must now be considered as part of the suite of service delivery options for all clinicians. Aims: To explore the perceived barriers and facilitators of telehealth among community paediatric SLTs before and after their use of a telehealth platform with an embedded standardised assessment tool. Methods & Procedures: Mixed‐methods questionnaires were developed for this study and completed by SLTs before and after the 3‐month trial of the telehealth platform. A total of 38 SLTs completed the pre‐trial questionnaire and training in the use of telehealth platform (Coviu), including instruction in using a standardised, norm referenced language test as an integrated tool within the Coviu platform. A total of 27 SLTs went on to use the telehealth platform, and 25 of these completed the post‐trial questionnaire on which subsequent qualitative and quantitative analysis was completed. Outcomes & Results: Prior to using the platform, perceived barriers included technology issues, limited clinician experience and concerns around parent acceptance of the service. Potential facilitators included access to appropriate platforms, tools and resources as well as increased clinician confidence with telehealth. Following the trial, barriers to telehealth use continued to include technology barriers, particularly internet stability, and client issues, including suitability for telehealth services. Facilitators for future telehealth use included access to appropriate platforms for telehealth, stable and appropriate internet connectivity, and more extensive telehealth resources for both assessment and intervention for this mode of service delivery. Conclusions & Implications: This study provides insights into the perceptions of the barriers and facilitating factors for telehealth use among community‐based SLTs. This information will be useful in developing strategies to promote uptake and effective and confident use of telehealth as a mode of service delivery beyond the pandemic. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Research about telehealth has shown that it is a reliable and valid way of delivering speech pathology services, yet many clinicians have been wary of its use and uptake of telehealth prior to COVID‐19 had been limited. We wanted to know what SLTs thought about using telehealth before and after participating in a 3‐month trial of a telehealth platform with an embedded formal language assessment. What this study adds to existing knowledge: This study indicates that technology issues including internet stability are a barrier to effective telehealth services, but that appropriate telehealth platforms, resources and experience are facilitators of uptake and successful use of telehealth. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This information will be useful in developing strategies to promote uptake and effective and confident use of telehealth as a mode of service delivery for children during and beyond the pandemic, including those isolated by geographical or transport barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Inter‐professional collaboration (IPC) has been recommended for many years as a means by which the needs of children with developmental language disorders (DLD) can be met at school. However, effective IPC remains difficult to achieve and our knowledge of how to support it is limited. A shared understanding between those involved has been identified as critical to IPC. Aims: To examine the literature, as one source of data, for evidence of a shared understanding between the fields of speech and language therapy (SLT) and education about children with DLD and how such needs can best be met at school. Methods & Procedures: An integrative review of the literature was undertaken. A systematic search of the published, peer‐reviewed literature (between 2006 and 2016) was conducted for empirical and theoretical papers and a manual search was undertaken to obtain a representative sample of policy/professional guidelines. A total of 81 papers across SLT and education were included in the review. The papers were scrutinized using a qualitative content analysis. Main Contribution: Although some commonality between perspectives in the literature was identified, differences between the fields dominated. These differences related to how DLD is conceptualized; how children's needs are assessed; which outcomes are prioritized and how best these outcomes can be achieved. We also found differences about what constitutes useful knowledge to guide practice. We suggest that the nature of the differences we identified in the literature may have negative implications for practitioners wishing to collaborate to meet the needs of children with DLD in school. The perspectives of practising SLTs and teachers need to be sought to determine whether the findings from the literature reflect dilemmas in practice. Conclusions: Effective IPC is essential to meet the needs of children with DLD in school; yet, it remains difficult to achieve. Our review of the literature across SLT and education indicates evidence of a lack of shared understanding about DLD. If these differences are also evident in practice, then a conceptual model to support IPC may be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is an increasing number of technological resources available to speech and language therapists (SLTs) for use in clinical practice, but the factors that influence SLTs' selection and use of such resources are not well understood. In related fields, technology acceptance models have been employed to explain users' adoption of technology and to inform the advancement of empirically supported technological resources. Aims: To determine the factors that influence SLTs' use of technology for clinical practice by testing a model of their technology acceptance and use. Methods & Procedures: We surveyed 209 practising SLTs in the United States representative of the speech and language membership of the American Speech–Language–Hearing Association (ASHA). Participants completed a 38‐item electronic survey representing four categories: (1) technology use, (2) technology attitudes and factors influencing technology use, (3) employment information and (4) demographics. Items measuring technology attitudes served as indicators of the research model, which mapped the primary relationships of a technology acceptance model. Survey data were collected before the Covid‐19 pandemic. Outcomes & Results: The research model accounted for 66% of the variance in SLTs' behavioural intention to use technology, which significantly and positively predicted the amount of time they reportedly spent using technology in the workplace. Subjective norms and attitudes towards technology use directly predicted the intention to use technology. Perceived usefulness and ease of use indirectly predicted intention to use technology. Survey respondents reported using technology during 48% (SD = 24%) of their overall weekly work hours on average, with a large majority reporting using technology at least once per week for planning (89% of respondents), assessment (66% of respondents) or intervention (90% of respondents). Conclusions & Implications: These findings statistically explain the relationships between SLTs' attitudes and their intention to use technology for clinical practice, contributing to our understanding of why SLTs adopt certain technologies. We also detail the nature and frequency of technology use in the clinical practice of SLTs. Future directions for this work include further exploring use categories, employing direct measurements of technology use and exploring the impact of recent changes in SLT service delivery due to the Covid‐19 pandemic on SLTs' technology attitudes. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectExisting research about the adoption and use of technological resources by SLTs indicates that they select tools based on convenience, cost and recommendations by others.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study is the first to develop and test a research model of SLTs' technology attitudes. The findings from model testing demonstrate the significant predictors of SLTs' behavioural intention to use technology for clinical purposes. Intent of use is related to how much SLTs use technology in the workplace.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?The present findings can inform interventions targeting the design and adoption of electronic SLT resources that are empirically supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As part of their professional responsibilities, speech–language therapists and audiologists are required to deliver bad news. Aims: The aim of this qualitative study is to describe and characterize the subjective experience of speech–language therapists and audiologists when delivering bad news to clients or their family members. Methods & Procedures: A group of 156 speech–language therapists and audiologists replied in writing to an open question asking them to describe a clinical encounter in which they delivered bad news. The texts that were generated in response to this question served as a data base. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyse data and generate themes. Outcomes & Results: Thematic analysis of participants' texts revealed the challenges inherent to the delivery of bad news. Four main themes emerged from text analysis: difficulty in phrasing the news; the deliverer's emotional experience; the receiver's reaction; and being alone or in companion with another healthcare provider during the delivery of the bad news. Conclusions & Implications: Speech–language therapists and audiologists experience difficulties similar to those experienced by other healthcare professionals when delivering bad news. Nevertheless, speech–language therapists and audiologists seem to perceive the delivery of bad news situation in a broader sense than the conventional definition given to this term in the medical arena. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectThe task of delivering bad news is stressful to healthcare professionals. Most of the literature on the topic pertains to physicians. Little is known regarding the delivery of bad news in speech–language therapy and audiology.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study highlights the challenges that speech–language therapists and audiologists encounter when delivering bad news. Furthermore, it illuminates the implicit perceptions of these professionals regarding what is considered 'bad news'.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?The emotional challenges associated with the delivery of bad news underscore the importance of support and training regarding the delivery of bad news. It is especially important to prepare for a client's difficult questions, and to prefer a collaborative approach to the delivery of bad news. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech–language therapists (SLTs) seek a range of educational opportunities for training in adult videofluoroscopic swallow studies (VFSS). However, variable training methods and/or unequal access to training can influence VFSS practice. Aims: To document current SLT needs and barriers to VFSS training and to determine if a new beginner‐level VFSS eLearning program would assist to meet their training needs. The program incorporated multimedia modules on preparing, conducting, interpreting and reporting VFSS. Methods & Procedures: SLTs with limited experience in adult VFSS completed surveys relating to VFSS training experience and barriers, and perceived changes in knowledge, skills and confidence on core VFSS module topics pre‐ (n = 36) and post‐ (n = 32) eLearning training. Outcomes & Results: Inconsistent access to VFSS training opportunities and time‐related work pressures were reported as the greatest training barriers. SLTs viewed the eLearning program as a suitable option for VFSS training. Post‐training, participants perceived they gained confidence, as well as improved knowledge and skills in all VFSS aspects along with generalised benefits for dysphagia management. SLTs indicated that key benefits of the eLearning program were its comprehensive content and self‐directed learning with multimedia tools, which afforded theoretical and practical learning opportunities. Conclusions & Implications: The eLearning program offered SLTs free access to beginner‐level adult VFSS training, meeting many identified training needs and providing a foundation from which to develop further practical knowledge and skills within a VFSS clinic setting. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectSLTs demonstrate variable knowledge and skill in conducting and interpreting VFSS, which can impact dysphagia diagnosis and management. While access to VFSS training can be challenging, the barriers to training for SLTs have not been clearly documented. Research has confirmed that eLearning can be used effectively in healthcare education, and in some aspects of VFSS training; however, it is yet to be applied to address the broad range of VFSS training needs.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study describes the SLT reported barriers to VFSS training which include limited access to formal and practical training, workload‐related time pressures and the complexity of learning the VFSS skill set. The findings highlight that an eLearning program, was an accepted mode of learning for VFSS training. SLTs reported the online program met their learning needs by improving access to training, the multimedia program features supported their understanding of complex anatomical and physiological concepts, and training frameworks assisted their clinical reasoning and VFSS interpretation.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?eLearning can assist in overcoming many VFSS training barriers identified by SLTs and the multimedia aspects of eLearning can effectively support VFSS beginner‐level education to complement and expedite in‐clinic practical training. Given that VFSS results inform decisions regarding commencement and progression of oral intake and swallow rehabilitation, enhanced VFSS training has the potential to positively influence dysphagia outcomes and quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech and language therapists (SLTs) are increasingly engaging in school‐based interventions targeting children with language difficulties. Collaborative work between teachers and SLTs has shown to be beneficial in fostering language development in all children. Both groups of professionals have different but complementary roles in offering language support, according to children's needs. Effective collaboration between SLTs and teachers requires both parties to understand their roles and practices in schools. However, little is known about language support practices in Lebanese preschools and the roles of SLTs in these contexts. Aims: (1) To explore the perceptions and reported practices among preschool teachers (pre‐KTs) to support language development; (2) to investigate the current practices of SLTs in preschools; and (3) to understand pre‐KTs' and SLTs' perceptions of the SLTs' role in Lebanese preschools. Method & Procedures: Using a quantitative method, the study reports the results of two questionnaires (one for pre‐KTs and one for SLTs) that were developed based on a review of the academic literature and adapted to the contextual realities. Questionnaires were completed in hard or soft copy by pre‐KTs and through an online survey by SLTs. Outcomes & Results: The questionnaires were completed by 1259 out of 1442 pre‐KTs from 175 Lebanese preschools, and by 200 out of 391 SLTs from across Lebanon. First, the findings show that both professional groups recognize they have a role in supporting language development. Second, differences in reported practices were identified regarding language strategies for children with communication needs. In particular, pre‐KTs reported less use of specific language strategies targeting children with language difficulties, while SLTs reported that their practices in schools remain primarily focused on children with communication needs. Finally, the analysis of perceptions showed a lack of acknowledgement of the SLTs' role in the prevention of communication and language disorders among all children. Conclusions & Implications: This study provides an overview of the perceptions and reported practices of language development support in Lebanese preschools. The majority of SLTs and pre‐KTs acknowledge their role in supporting language development. However, the slight differences in perceptions of SLT roles in prevention interventions highlight the necessity for SLTs to promote their active involvement in services targeting all children. Future research will investigate how SLTs are beginning to reconceptualize their role in intervention for preschool children. This will help to better define SLTs' roles and responsibilities in educational settings and foster effective professional collaboration. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectCollaboration between teachers and SLTs has been shown to be beneficial in supporting language among all children. The way SLTs and pre‐KTs view each other's roles could result in more effective professional collaboration. The SLT profession in Lebanon emerged about 20 years ago, yet SLTs are still struggling to define a framework for the scope of their practice in Lebanese preschools and to increase awareness of the relevance of their intervention in language.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThe results revealed that there are major agreements between pre‐KTs and SLTs concerning the support of language development in preschools. However, the findings highlight slight differences in the perception of the SLTs' role in the prevention of communication, language and literacy disorders in educational settings. It seems that their role is more commonly acknowledged for children with identified language and communication needs. Moreover, despite the strong agreement between both professionals on the role of the SLT to target all children, SLTs' practices in preschools are still mostly limited to meeting only referred and diagnosed needs in children.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?This study's findings contribute to a better understanding of the perceptions regarding the roles and practices of both groups of professionals in language development. The differences in how the SLTs' roles are perceived could lead to a more difficult implementation of collaborative language practices in preschools. It is therefore necessary to ensure a better understanding of the roles played by professionals, who could receive the relevant training in undergraduate education programmes. There is also a pressing need to provide a clearer definition of SLTs' roles in educational settings by reconceptualizing them into a preventive approach in collaboration with teachers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is increasing recognition of the impact that dementia has upon swallowing and at mealtimes, and the significant effect this can have on people with dementia's health and well‐being. However, there remains a paucity of evidence for assessment and intervention practices for dysphagia and mealtime difficulties. Furthermore, there is a limited understanding of how speech and language therapists (SLTs) support people with these dementia‐related issues and what are the barriers and facilitators to practice. Further research is therefore needed to guide policy as well as service guideline and delivery development. Aims: To establish the current practices of SLTs managing dementia‐related dysphagia and mealtime difficulties in the UK and Republic of Ireland (ROI), and to establish their opinions and experiences of what challenges or supports to practice they have encountered. Methods & Procedures: An anonymous, cross‐sectional web‐based survey was developed and distributed to SLTs working in the UK and ROI. Respondents completed a questionnaire that consisted of open and closed questions across nine topic areas. Closed responses were evaluated using descriptive statistics; open‐ended questions were analysed using conventional content analysis. Outcomes & Results: A total of 310 people accessed the survey, and 125 respondents completed it fully. While respondents agreed on their role in dysphagia management, they varied in their views on the extent of their role in managing mealtime difficulties. Additionally, their self‐rated knowledge of mealtime difficulties in dementia was lower than their dysphagia knowledge. The respondents predominantly based their management decisions on their clinical experience of working with people with dementia. They primarily used compensatory strategies and frequently cited the need for family and care staff training. Respondents also highlighted barriers to effective management and training provision such as inefficient referral systems, a lack of carer knowledge and lack of SLT resources. Conclusions & Implications: The results provide valuable insight into the issues facing SLTs practising in this area. The SLTs surveyed considered dysphagia a core part of their role when supporting people with dementia; however, respondents' views on mealtime difficulties varied. This highlights the need to establish consensus guidelines on the SLT's role in order to avoid variations in service delivery that could negatively impact the health and well‐being of people with dementia. Moreover, further research to develop efficient and effective training for care staff supporting mealtime difficulties and dysphagia is essential. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectResearch indicates that people with dementia develop dysphagia and mealtime difficulties as dementia progresses. SLTs often manage these, but there is no research on the effective assessment and management procedures, or guidance on best practice.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis paper provides an understanding of the variation in practice across the UK and ROI. Respondents described barriers to delivering an effective service and frequently linked these to the SLTs' resources as well as service constraints.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?These findings support the need for future research to develop guidelines for SLT practice in this area. They also support the need to examine resource allocation and workforce management to enable SLTs to manage dementia‐related dysphagia and mealtime difficulties effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It has long been recognized that tracheoesophageal speech (TES) rehabilitation after laryngectomy is a specialized area of practice for speech and language therapist (SLTs) due to the complex nature of patient presentation and the invasive components of the SLT's role in this area. Therefore, postgraduate experience and training is required to work competently and safely in this clinical area. However, it is generally acknowledged that the steps and processes followed by individual clinicians to achieve this training and clinical skill development are inconsistent and vary widely across services. There is a need to identify critical elements deemed most beneficial to clinical skill development in order to inform future training models. Aims: To explore clinicians' perceptions of factors that contribute to training and clinical skills development in the area of TES rehabilitation post‐laryngectomy. Methods & Procedures: All participants were SLTs working in an Australian clinical service, with a current or recent clinical caseload that included patients using TES. A total of 36 SLTs were recruited and then grouped by level of experience (novice n = 15, intermediate n = 7, experienced n = 14). Each participant took part in one small focus group with other participants of similar experience level. Ten focus groups were conducted, each of approximately 60 min in duration. A semi‐structured interview guide was used to facilitate the discussion of issues relating to training in this area. Thematic analysis was used to analyse transcripts and identify themes. Outcomes & Results: Interviews identified six key themes, including: Learning with and from others; Formal programmes; Hands‐on learning; Processes that influence training; and Individual influences. SLTs reported both positive issues and elements that were challenging across all five themes. The final (sixth) theme was identified regarding clinician perceptions of how this area differed to specialized training in other areas of the profession. The majority of themes were discussed equally by clinicians across all three experience levels. Conclusions & Implications: Participants across all experience levels identified that multiple factors contributed to clinicians successfully gaining skills, understanding and competency when working in TES rehabilitation post‐laryngectomy. These factors, when fully considered and incorporated into future SLTs training pathways and opportunities, have the potential to optimize competency, skill acquisition and maintenance in this area. What this paper addsWhat is already known on this subjectWhile studies have considered the training, preparation and knowledge base of SLTs working in the clinical area of TES, the focus has predominantly been at the immediate postgraduate level or assessment of university course work. No studies have used a qualitative methodology to consider the reflections and perceptions of clinicians' training pathways and training needs across all levels of experience for this clinical area.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThe results of this study build upon the existing body of literature regarding education and training in this area, determining factors SLTs feel are required to successfully gain skills, understanding and competency when working in TES rehabilitation. The findings highlight that training pathways and methods in this clinical area are an ongoing consideration for SLTs regardless of experience level and have the ability to impact on future competency programmes, training opportunities and delivery methods in this area.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Effective and ongoing postgraduate training programmes and professional development opportunities have the potential to positively impact on professional competence and confidence, patient safety and overall service delivery. Hence, the themes generated from this research highlight essential factors to include within training and professional development programmes for SLTs in TES rehabilitation. This information can be used to help optimize current training pathways for all experience levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The involvement of speech and language therapists (SLTs) within paediatric palliative care (PPC) settings has been recognized within the extant literature. However, there is little understanding of SLT's specific roles and practices when working with this vulnerable cohort of children and their families. As part of a larger body of work to develop consensus‐based recommendations for SLTs working in PPC, it is important to investigate demographic and caseload characteristics. Aims: This exploratory study aimed to gather previously undocumented international demographic data pertaining to SLT service provision, caseload and training in PPC. Additionally, it sought to ascertain the current treatment and assessment approaches of SLTs, and if variations exist in beliefs and practices. Methods & Procedures: An anonymous cross‐sectional survey was designed and reported according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E‐Surveys (CHERRIES). The online survey consisted of 40 items spanning four domains: (1) demographic information, (2) caseload information, (3) service provision and (4) training and education. SLTs from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, Ireland and the United States were recruited using a purposive snowball sampling approach. Descriptive analysis of closed‐ended survey responses and content analysis of open‐ended responses are presented. Outcomes & Results: A total of 52 respondents completed the survey. SLTs worked in a variety of PPC settings, with patients of varying age and disease groups. Over 50% of participants reported working in PPC for ≤ 4 years. Genetic disorders (34%), oncology (27%) and neurological conditions (21%) made up a significant portion of respondents' caseloads. Reported treatments and assessment approaches used by SLTs are not unique to a PPC population. Barriers and enablers for practice were identified. A portion of participants did not feel trained and prepared to assess (19.2%) or treat (15.4%) PPC clients. Conclusions & Implications: This study confirms that SLTs internationally have a role in the management of communication and swallowing impairments in a PPC context. However, whether current training and resources adequately support SLTs in this role remains questionable. This paper helps to provide SLTs, administrators, professional associations and tertiary institutions with foundational data to help inform workforce planning, advocacy efforts and training priorities. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectThe published multidisciplinary literature has identified that SLTs have a role in PPC. However, there has been no targeted research investigating the professional characteristics of clinicians in this context, nor any detailed information regarding associated clinician beliefs or management approaches.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study is a snapshot of attributes, practice patterns and beliefs of SLTs who work with a PPC population. It highlights SLT perspectives of education and training, as well as meta‐perceptions of themselves within the multidisciplinary team.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Data presented in this paper will help to enable SLTs, organizations and associations to augment service provision and determine future professional development priorities within the field of PPC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Discourse assessment and treatment in aphasia rehabilitation is a priority focus for a range of stakeholder groups. However, a significant majority of speech and language therapists (SLTs) infrequently conduct discourse analysis, and do not feel competent in doing so. Known barriers identified in other countries, specifically a lack of time, training, expertise and resources, affect use of discourse analysis in clinical practice. Aims: To investigate UK SLTs' reported practices and views of discourse analysis, barriers and facilitators, and clinical feasibility in aphasia rehabilitation. Methods & Procedures: An online survey of 52 questions adapted from existing research and incorporating behaviour change literature was created for the study and piloted. UK SLTs working in aphasia rehabilitation for at least 6 months were invited to participate. Potential participants were contacted through national and local clinical excellence networks, a National Health Service (NHS) bespoke e‐mail list, and national magazine advertisement, and the study was also advertised on social media (Twitter). Therapists read an online participant information sheet and submitted individual electronic consent online; then progressed to the Qualtrics survey. Descriptive, correlational and inferential statistical analyses were conducted, and content analysis was carried out on the questions requiring text. Outcomes & Results: A total of 211 valid responses were received from primarily female SLTs, aged 20–40 years, working full‐time in the NHS in England, in community, inpatient and acute/subacute multidisciplinary settings. A total of 30% SLTs collected discourse analysis often, were mostly very experienced, and working part‐time in community settings. Years of experience was predictive of use. Discourse was most often collected using standardized picture descriptions and recounts during initial assessment. Samples were infrequently recorded, and typically transcribed in real‐time. Most SLTs (53–95%) reported making clinical judgements or manually counted words, sentences, communication of ideas and errors, and were confident in doing so. Barriers included time constraints; lack of expertise, confidence, training, resources and equipment; and patient severity. Discourse 'super‐users' were distinguished by significantly higher professional motivation for discourse and workplace opportunity than other SLTs, and 'non‐users' were distinguished by significantly less knowledge and skills in discourse analysis than other SLTs. SLTs reported a desire and need for training, new/assistive tools and time to do more discourse analysis in practice. Conclusions & Implications: Clinicians were highly engaged and relatively active in at least some aspects of discourse analysis practice. Interventions that target individual clinicians as well as organizations and systems are needed to improve the uptake of discourse analysis in practice. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subject?Discourse in aphasia rehabilitation is a priority in clinical practice and research. However, the majority of clinicians infrequently collect and analyse discourse. Research in Australia and the United States indicated that lack of time, assessment resources and relevant knowledge and skills are the main barriers to use.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeCompared with existing research, UK SLTs were more likely to see discourse analysis as part of their role and experienced fewer barriers, and more SLTs did it at least sometimes in clinic. However, practices were limited by lack of training, giving rise to challenges in selecting and interpreting findings for clients. More use was predicted by more experience and commitment to discourse analysis, particularly where workplaces supported this approach. Less use was associated with less knowledge and skills in discourse analysis. Practice and decision‐making were influenced by client factors and constrained to a lesser degree by logistical challenges.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this study?Education and training in discourse analyses and in specific procedures are needed to improve individual clinicians' knowledge, skills and confidence in using discourse analysis for clients' rehabilitation. Equally, organizational and systems changes are needed to promote, support and reinforce discourse analysis in the workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Silent aspiration (SA)—airway entry of food, drink or other material without a cough response—is common post‐stroke. Clinical swallowing examination misses up to 40% of dysphagic patients with SA. This may put these patients at risk of aspiration pneumonia, prolonged length of hospital stay and increased healthcare costs. After stroke, the laryngeal cough reflex is frequently impaired with significant relationships between pneumonia rates and reduced cough strength and sensitivity. There has been a significant amount of recent interest in cough reflex testing (CRT) as a potential means to improve clinical identification of patients at risk of SA. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the methodology and protocols for use of CRT with widely varying outcomes reported in the literature. Aims: To provide an overview of current practice in the UK with regards to clinical use of CRT by speech and language therapists (SLTs) in acute stroke settings and to explore the perceptions regarding its potential application in clinical dysphagia management and the barriers and facilitators associated with adopting CRT in clinical practice. Methods & Procedures: A cross‐sectional web‐based survey was developed, piloted and delivered. The survey targeted all UK‐based SLTs working in acute stroke settings. Outcomes & Results: A total of 129 SLTs with varying levels of experience of CRT from all regions of the UK responded. Only four SLT services in the UK were reported to be currently using CRT clinically with acute stroke patients. A total of 29% of respondents who were not using CRT were considering introducing CRT into their service's dysphagia protocol. Variation was reported in the procedures and protocols. Overall, users reported improved confidence in the clinical detection of SA and felt that the introduction of CRT had improved their patient‐related outcomes. Issues included difficulties procuring citric acid, implications for SLT time (including service set‐up and delivery of CRT) and restricted access to instrumental assessments. Conclusions & Implications: This survey gives valuable insight into the current practice and perceptions of SLTs in the UK working in acute stroke settings in relation to CRT. It highlights discrepancies between reported approaches and recommendations from existing guidelines and validation studies. The variation in responses indicates a need to develop a consensus statement and further research to guide practice. What this study addsWhat is already known on the subjectCRT is gaining popularity as a screening tool for the clinical identification of SA with acute stroke patients. However, there is a lack of consensus in the literature regarding the methodology and protocols with widely varying outcomes. Further work needs to be done to standardize its use, especially if it is to be incorporated into dysphagia protocols for use in the acute stroke setting.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis survey of SLTs working in acute stroke settings highlights variability in practice in CRT service delivery in the UK, reflecting findings from the existing CRT literature.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?The findings of this study support the need for further research relating to clinical screening tests for SA and standardization of methodology and protocols for CRT use if its use is to be continued clinically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) celebrates its 75th anniversary in 2020. The historical study of speech and language therapy (SLT) has been very limited. A small number of publications have traced the changes in the profession over time, but to date there has been no comprehensive work undertaken to gain an insight into the experiences of UK speech therapists who entered the newly formed profession after 1945. Aims: To use an oral history methodology to explore the life stories of early members of the profession. Methods & Procedures: Participants were recruited through RCSLT networks. Interviews were held across England and Scotland. Conversations were audio recorded and analysed using thematic network analysis. Archive material was used to complement participants' narratives. Outcomes & Results: Participants were 19 women who qualified between 1945 and 1968. Three global themes emerged: personal, professional and political stories. On a personal level, each reported steps towards autonomy and agency within the social constraints they experienced. Professionally, all commented on the vast expansion in the range of identifiable clinical fields between 1945, when the first participant qualified, and 2008, when the last participant retired. Politics and social policies impacted upon their lives and, sometimes to their surprise, the participants found themselves campaigning politically in pursuit of fairness for their profession. Conclusions & Implications: This paper offers a unique insight into the challenges and achievements participants experienced over their careers as early practitioners in the UK profession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]