Search

The article discusses an investigation into the usefulness of the group interaction training programme It Takes Two to Talk (ITTT) for parents of children with motor disorders. The effects of the programme on parent-child interaction, therapists who provided the training, and the views of parents of young children with motor disorders on the programme's usefulness and acceptability were examined. The research methods used, the participants in the programme, an interview guide, the data collection and analysis, and parents' expectations of speech and language therapy are noted. It was found that the parents were enthusiastic about the outcomes of the ITTT programme for themselves and their children

Background Speech and language therapy for young children who have motor disorders targets both the children themselves and their parents. Therapy for parents often involves training about communication and how to foster children's development. It Takes Two to Talk – The Hanen Program® for Parents has become popular in the UK, but has not been specifically evaluated for this client group. This study, which was part of a larger investigation of the acceptability and potential effects of the programme on the communication patterns of mothers and their young children with motor disorders, investigated therapists' experiences of providing the training in the National Health Service (NHS) and their views on its effectiveness. Methods Four focus groups, which involved 16 speech and language therapists who provide It Takes Two to Talk in NHS Trusts in England, were analysed using qualitative methods. Results The themes indicated that therapists perceived the training programme to be effective in helping parents to develop a facilitative communication style. Therapists reported secondary outcomes of positive changes in parents' confidence and in relationships between parents and their children and between parents and therapists. Barriers to the provision and success of the programme were thought to relate to resources, parents' apprehensions about the programme's content and delivery and support from key stakeholders. Barriers were seen to be minimized in services where other members of the healthcare teams actively supported the training programme and where the intervention was integrated as part of a care pathway. Conclusions The information from this study may assist service providers in the marketing, planning and delivery of new intervention methods, to ensure that they are seen as valuable and acceptable by parents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Drooling is common in children with disordered oral-motor control. There is little evidence about the comparative effectiveness of different interventions used to reduce the impact of drooling. Anecdotal reports suggest clinicians' management of drooling varies widely. The aims of this survey were to establish which drooling interventions are currently used, how their effectiveness is monitored and how frequently adverse effects are reported. Methods 151 UK paediatricians completed a questionnaire about their management of drooling. Results Paediatricians saw one new child with problematic drooling and three follow-up children per month. The most common prescribing pattern was hyoscine first line (84.7%) followed by glycopyrronium bromide second line. The reported rate of adverse effects of medications was lower than expected (median 10% for hyoscine). Very few paediatricians used standardized methods of measuring the medication's effectiveness or adverse effects. Conclusion Paediatricians regularly see small numbers of children with problematic drooling. Their clinical management of drooling varies; this is most likely because of a lack of evidence about the most effective approach. Comparative trials of interventions and the development of evidence-based clinical guidelines would improve the management of children's drooling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]