Search

Background: Acute and late toxicities in patients treated with (chemo)radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) is common and can negatively impact quality of life and performance. Performance status instruments measure the functional ability to perform daily life activities and are important tools in the oncologic population. Aims: Since Dutch performance status scales for the HNC population are lacking, we conducted this study to translate the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer Patients (PSS‐HN) into Dutch (D‐PSS‐HN) and to validate this version. Methods & Procedures: The D‐PSS‐HN was translated into Dutch according to the internationally described cross‐cultural adaptation process. It was administered to HNC patients and together with the Functional Oral Intake Scale completed by a speech and language pathologist at five different time points during the first 5 weeks of (chemo)radiotherapy. Patients were asked each time to complete the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy and the Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to calculate convergent and discriminant validity and the evolution of D‐PSS‐HN scores was assessed by means of linear mixed models. Outcomes & Results: A total of 35 patients were recruited and > 98% of the clinician‐rated scales were completed. Convergent and discriminant validity were demonstrated, with all correlations rs between 0.467 and 0.819, and between 0.132 and 0.256, respectively. The subscales of the D‐PSS‐HN are sensitive to detect changes through time. Conclusion & Implications: The D‐PSS‐HN is a valid and reliable instrument to assess performance status in patients with HNC treated with (chemo)radiotherapy. It is a useful tool to measure HNC patients' current diet level and functional abilities to perform daily life activities. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Acute and late toxicities in patients treated with (chemo)radiotherapy for HNC are common and can negatively impact quality of life and performance. Performance status instruments measure the functional ability to perform daily life activities and are important tools in the oncologic population. However, Dutch performance status scales for the HNC population are lacking. Therefore, we translated the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer Patients (PSS‐HN) into Dutch (D‐PSS‐HN) and validated this version. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: We translated the PSS‐HN and demonstrated its convergent and discriminant validity. The subscales of the D‐PSS‐HN are sensitive to detect changes through time. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The D‐PSS‐HN is a useful tool to measure HNC patients' functional abilities to perform daily life activities. The tool can easily be used in clinical settings: since data collection duration is very short, this facilitates clinical (and research‐related) implementation of the scale. Patients' individual needs could be identified by using the D‐PSS‐HN, resulting in more appropriate approaches and (early) referrals if needed. Interdisciplinary communication could be facilitated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The majority of children with cerebral palsy (CP) experience challenges in functional communication from a young age. A pivotal aspect of functional communication is language comprehension. A variety of classification systems and questionnaires are available to classify and describe functional communication skills in children with CP. A better understanding of the convergent validity of (subsections of) these tools, as well as their relationship with spoken language comprehension, will be valuable in both clinical practice and research. Aims: To investigate the convergent validity of (subsections of) functional communication tools and the relationship with spoken language comprehension in children with CP. Methods & Procedures: Cross‐sectional data on 138 children were subdivided into three developmental stages based on (Dutch) educational phases: ages 18 months–3;11y (n = 59), 4;0–5;11 years (n = 37) and 6;0–8;11 years (n = 42). The following functional communication tools were used to classify and describe functional communication: Communication Function Classification System (CFCS), subscales of the Caregivers Priorities and Child Health Index of Life with Disabilities—Dutch Version (CPCHILD‐DV) and the Focus on Communication Under Six‐34 (FOCUS‐34) questionnaire. Spoken language comprehension was assessed with the Computer‐Based instrument for Low motor Language Testing (C‐BiLLT). Correlations between the functional communication tools, and with the C‐BiLLT, were calculated using Pearson's and Spearman's correlation coefficients. It was hypothesized a priori that correlations of at least 0.60 suggest good convergent validity. Outcomes & Results: At all developmental stages, a significant ordered decreasing tendency of communication outcomes was found across CFCS levels; lower CFCS levels were associated with lower scores on the CPCHILD‐DV and FOCUS‐34, and with a lower level of spoken language comprehension (C‐BiLLT). Correlation coefficients of the functional communication tools exceeded 0.60 at all developmental stages. Correlations between C‐BiLLT raw scores and the functional communication tools varied between 0.351 and 0.591 at developmental stage 18 months–3;11 years, between 0.781 and 0.897 at developmental stage 4;0–5;11 years, and between 0.635 and 0.659 at developmental stage 6;0–8;11 years. Conclusions & Implications: The functional communication tools assessed in this study showed convergent validity at all developmental stages. The CFCS, currently most widely used in paediatric rehabilitation, is adequate in the classification of functional communication. However, for more detailed clinical goal setting and evaluation of change in functional communication, the additional use of FOCUS‐34 or CPCHILD‐DV is recommended. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: A range of functional communication tools are available that help describe and classify functional communication in children with CP. These include the CFCS, subsections of CPCHILD‐DV and FOCUS‐34. The CFCS classifies functional communication in daily life with familiar and unfamiliar partners. Specific subsections of the CPCHILD‐DV and FOCUS‐34 include items that pertain to communicative participation. The innovative C‐BiLLT provides a standardized method to assess spoken language comprehension in children with CP and significant motor impairments. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: In the present study, convergent validity was confirmed between CFCS and specific subsections of the CPCHILD‐DV and FOCUS‐34. Correlations between these functional communication tools and the C‐BiLLT were moderate to strong. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: For clinical and research purposes (for instance, accurate prescription of augmentative and alternative communication—AAC), healthcare and educational professionals together with parents need to know how functional communication tools converge and how functional communication levels relate to the comprehension of spoken language. The CFCS provides a valid classification of functional communication abilities in children with CP. However, to measure change in functional communication and to evaluate treatment outcomes, use of additional functional communication tools such as the CPCHILD‐DV and FOCUS‐34 is recommended. When discrepancies are found between communicative abilities and spoken language comprehension, it is strongly recommended that valid tools are used in a more detailed examination of the child's spoken language comprehension skills and functional communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While implementation studies in aphasia management have shown promising improvements to clinical practice, it is currently unknown if aphasia implementation outcomes are sustained and what factors may influence clinical sustainability. Aims: To evaluate the sustainment (i.e., sustained improvement of aphasia management practices and domains influencing clinicians' practice) and sustainability (i.e., factors influencing sustainability) outcomes of the Acute Aphasia IMplementation Study (AAIMS). Methods & Procedures: A convergent interactive mixed‐methods sustainability evaluation was conducted on two previously delivered implementation interventions (AAIMS). The AAIMS interventions were targeted at improving either written aphasia‐friendly information provision (Intervention A) or collaborative goal‐setting (Intervention B). Outcomes were collected 2 and 3 years post‐implementation, addressing the research questions of sustainment (e.g., medical record audits and behavioural constructs questionnaires) and sustainability (e.g., post‐study focus groups and organizational readiness surveys). Quantitative sustainability data were compared with post‐implementation data, allowing for sustainment to be determined. Clinicians' perspectives on sustainability outcomes and challenges were analysed using framework analysis and integrated with the quantitative findings. Outcomes & Results: A total of 35 speech–language therapists (SLTs) from four hospitals participated. The medical records of 79 patients were audited in the sustainability period compared with the 107 medical records audited during AAIMS. Overall, there was variable sustainment of the target behaviours; implementation for Intervention A was not sustained at either sustainability time point (2018 = 47.8% decrease; 2019 = 22.78% decrease), but implementation for Intervention B was sustained at both time points (2018 = 7.78% increase; 2019 = 18.1% increase). There was a pattern of sustained change in the behaviour change domains targeted by the implementation interventions, where scores of the targeted domains increased over time (0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.05 to 0.30) and scores of the non‐targeted domains declined (−0.03, 95% CI = −0.11 to 0.04). Factors influencing sustainability were mainly related to 'processes', 'the inner context' and 'SLT characteristics', and these interacted dynamically to account for variation between teams. Conclusions & Implications: Implementation outcomes (i.e., practice changes) were not sustained to the same level for three of the four participating SLT teams, with variable or partial sustainment most common. While the factors influencing sustainability differed depending on the context and individuals involved, the most important factor influencing outcomes seemed to be the level to which behaviour‐change processes and strategies were embedded within the SLT department. Future implementation studies should incorporate sustainability measures from the onset and include follow‐ups and monitoring systems to help support sustained change in the long term. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: In post‐stroke aphasia management, there are few examples of long‐term sustainability of implementation outcomes. It is therefore unknown what factors are potentially important to sustain implementation of best‐practice recommendations in aphasia services. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: There is potential for implementation outcomes to be sustained long term, but sustainment is impacted by a range of factors. Ongoing facilitation or follow‐up after initial implementation may to useful to promote sustainment, but is not essential if processes are sufficiently embedded. Gradual implementation into practice may lead to better sustainment than rapid change that is quickly forgotten. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Future implementation efforts should incorporate sustainability measures from the onset. Applying a sustainability framework was useful to guide evaluations and explore factors influencing the sustainment outcomes and is recommended for those interested in sustainability. Results from our evaluation can be used to guide refinement and support future development of sustainable implementation interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The inaccurate estimation of language difficulties by teachers suggests the benefit of a short‐language measure that could be used to support their decisions about who requires referral to a speech–language therapist. While the literature indicates the potential for the development of a short‐language measure, evidence is lacking about which combination of language tasks it should include. Aims: To understand the number and nature of components/language tasks that should be included in a short‐language measure for children in the early school years. Methods & Procedures: Eight language tasks were administered to participants of the Early Language in Victoria Study (ELVS) at ages 5 (n = 995) and 7 (n = 1217). These included six language tasks measured by an omnibus language measure (which comprised a direction‐following, morphological‐completion, sentence‐recall, sentence‐formation, syntactic‐understanding and word‐association task) and a non‐word repetition and a receptive vocabulary task, measured by two task‐specific language measures. Scores were analyzed using principal component analysis (PCA), the Bland and Altman method, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Outcomes & Results: PCA revealed one main component of language that was assessed by all language tasks. The most effective combination of two tasks that measured this component was a direction‐following and a sentence‐recall task. It showed the greatest agreement with an omnibus language measure and exceeded the criterion for good discriminant accuracy (sensitivity = 94%, specificity = 91%, accuracy = 91%, at 1 SD (standard deviation) below the mean). Conclusions & Implications: Findings support the combination of a direction‐following and a sentence‐recall task to assess language ability effectively in the early school years. The results could justify the future production of a novel short‐language measure comprising a direction‐following and a sentence‐recall task to use as a screening tool in schools and to assess language ability in research participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]