Search

Background: Communication training for parents of young children with neurodisability is often delivered in groups and includes video coaching. Group teaching is problematic when there is wide variation in the characteristics and needs amongst participants. Aims: To assess the potential feasibility and acceptability of delivering one‐to‐one parent training supported by remote coaching using smartphone apps and of conducting further trials of the intervention. Methods & Procedures: We aimed to recruit eight children aged 12–48 months with motor disorders and communication difficulties and to provide families with individual parent training in six weekly home visits supplemented by remote coaching via smartphone apps. For outcome measurement, parents recorded their interaction with their child thrice weekly during baseline (3 weeks), intervention, post‐intervention (3 weeks) and follow‐up (1 week). Measures comprised parent responsiveness and counts of children's communication and vocalization. Research design feasibility was measured through rates of recruitment, attrition, outcome measure completion and agreement between raters on outcome measurement. Intervention feasibility was assessed through the proportion of therapy sessions received, the number of videos and text messages shared using the apps in remote coaching, and message content. Parents were interviewed about the acceptability of the intervention and trial design. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Outcomes & Results: Nine children were recruited over 16 weeks. All fitted the inclusion criteria. Four families withdrew from the study. Five families completed the intervention. No family submitted the target number of video recordings for outcome measurement. Interrater agreement was moderate for child communication (K = 0.46) and vocalization (K = 0.60) and high for The Responsive Augmentative and Alternative Communication Style scale (RAACS) (rs = 0.96). Parents who completed the intervention reported positive experiences of the programme and remote coaching via the apps. Therapist messages via the app contained comments on parent and child behaviour and requests for parental reflection/action; parental messages contained reflections on children's communication. Conclusions & Implications: The intervention and study design demanded high levels of parental involvement and was not suitable for all families. Recording shorter periods of interaction via mobile phones or using alternative methods of data collection may increase feasibility of outcome measurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To test the feasibility of recruitment, retention, outcome measures and internet delivery of dysarthria therapy for young people with cerebral palsy in a randomised controlled trial. Design Mixed methods. Single blind pilot randomised controlled trial, with control offered Skype therapy at end of study. Qualitative study of the acceptability of therapy delivery via Skype. Setting Nine speech and language therapy departments in northern England recruited participants to the study. Skype therapy was provided in a university setting. Participants Twenty-two children (14 M, 8 F) with dysarthria and cerebral palsy (mean age 8.8 years (SD 3.2)) agreed to take part. Participants were randomised to dysarthria therapy via Skype (n=11) or treatment as usual (n=11). Interventions Children received either usual speech therapy from their local therapist for 6 weeks or dysarthria therapy via Skype from a research therapist. Usual therapy sessions varied in frequency, duration and content. Skype dysarthria therapy focused on breath control and phonation to produce clear speech at a steady rate, and comprised three 40 min sessions per week for 6 weeks. Primary and secondary outcome measures Feasibility and acceptability of the trial design, intervention and outcome measures. Results Departments recruited two to three participants. All participants agreed to random allocation. None withdrew from the study. Recordings of children's speech were made at all time points and rated by listeners. Families allocated to Skype dysarthria therapy judged internet delivery of the therapy to be acceptable. All families reported that the study design was acceptable. Treatment integrity checks suggested that the phrases practised in one therapy exercise should be reduced in length. Conclusions A delayed treatment design, in which dysarthria therapy is offered at the end of the study to families allocated to treatment as usual, is acceptable. A randomised controlled trial of internet delivered dysarthria therapy is feasible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]