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: Speech and language therapy (SLT) education must meet the needs of the future workforce, training enough students who are competent practitioners able to meet the workforce demands. Increasing student numbers and the impact on placement providers mean students must be equipped for learning on placement. Simulation is a way of supporting students to develop their clinical skills and decision‐making in a safe, supportive environment. Aims: To explore the perspectives of SLT students who were introduced to simulation during their undergraduate degree at a UK university as part of a pilot study. The aim of the pilot was to listen to the students' voices to begin to understand their lived experiences of simulation and to gather views on how simulation can support their clinical learning. Methods & Procedures: Focus groups and semi‐structured interviews were carried out with second‐year BSc SLT students in semester 2 following the simulated learning activities and clinical placement. Qualitative data were gathered and thematic analysis was applied to the data to identify the barriers and enablers to students' clinical learning in simulation. Outcomes & Results: A total of 11 students responded out of a cohort of 38. Three key themes were identified from the analysis: individual learning needs, facilitator skill and programme‐level organization. Conclusions & Implications: Student experience of simulation was positive. One of the key elements students found to support their clinical skills was the importance of the safe space; support for learning instead of correction led them to engage in active learning. Key barriers to simulation related to having sufficient prior knowledge, the skills of the facilitator, group size and the wider learning landscape of the programme. In response to this pilot, there are plans to continue developing this model of simulation and embed simulation across the programme, led by a sound pedagogical approach with clear preparation and planning and building the necessary infrastructure. Other SLT programmes and practice educators developing simulation as part of their programmes or placement may wish to consider some of these findings to support the use of simulation in their workplace. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Simulation as a teaching methodology is widely used in medicine and nursing programmes. It is now used in various allied health professions and in some SLT programmes. There is evidence to suggest simulation increases student confidence and clinical skills without increasing the capacity on those offering clinical placements in practice. What is already known on this subject: This study offers a practical example of introducing simulation in an established undergraduate programme for SLT students. It explains the background to this innovative way of teaching clinical skills and explains why this approach could be beneficial for the future speech and language therapist. What are the clinical implications of this work?: This study gives practical examples of how simulation can work to facilitate student clinical learning and knowledge. It may offer ideas to those working in clinical practice to organize placements differently or add simulation elements to improve the student experience. Other educational establishments and placement educators may find the recommendations helpful in developing their own simulation approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Understanding the natural history of developmental speech and language impairments can support the selection of children whose difficulties are persistent rather than transitory. It can also provide information against which the effectiveness of intervention can be evaluated. However, natural history data are difficult to collect ethically. Furthermore, as soon as an impairment is identified, the behaviour of those around changes, thus creating some level of intervention. Longitudinal cohort studies, where intervention is minimal, or the control arm of randomized trials have provided the best evidence. However, occasional opportunities arise where service waiting lists can provide data about the progress of children who have not received intervention. This natural history study arose within an ethnically diverse, community paediatric speech and language therapy service in the UK where levels of social disadvantage are high. Aims: To identify (1) the characteristics of the children who attended initial assessment and were selected for treatment; (2) the differences between children who did and did not attend reassessment; and (3) the factors associated with outcomes. Methods & Procedures: A cohort of 545 children were referred and assessed as in need of therapy. Due to resource constraints, intervention was not available for an average of 12 months. Children were invited to attend for a reassessment of need. Initial and follow‐up assessments were conducted by experienced clinicians using service guidelines and the Therapy Outcomes Measures Impairment Scale (TOM‐I). Descriptive and multivariate regression analyses examined child outcomes for changes in communication impairment, demographic factors and length of wait. Outcomes & Results: At initial assessment, 55% of children presented with severe and profound communication impairments. Children offered appointments at clinics in areas of high social disadvantage were less likely to attend reassessment. By reassessment, 54% of children showed spontaneous improvement (mean TOM‐I rating change = 0.58). However, 83% were still judged to require therapy. Approximately 20% of children changed their diagnostic category. Age and impairment severity at initial assessment were the best predictors of continuing requirement for input. Conclusions & Implications: Although children do make spontaneous progress post‐assessment and without intervention, it is likely that the majority will continue to be assigned case status by a Speech and Language Therapist. However, when evaluating the effectiveness of interventions, clinicians need to factor in the progress that a proportion of the caseload will make spontaneously. Services should be mindful that a lengthy wait may disproportionately impact children who already face health and educational inequalities. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Data from longitudinal cohorts (where intervention has been minimal) and the no treatment control arms of randomized controlled trials have provided the best evidence of the natural progression of speech and language impairments in children. These studies provide a varied rate of resolution and progress depending on the case definitions and measurements used. What this study adds to existing knowledge: Uniquely, this study has evaluated the natural history of a large cohort of children who had been waiting for treatment for up to 18 months. Data showed that, over a period of waiting for intervention, the majority of those identified as a case by a Speech and Language Therapist remained a case. Using the TOM, on average children in the cohort made just over half a rating point progress during their waiting period. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The maintenance of treatment waiting lists is probably an unhelpful service strategy for two reasons: first, the case status of the majority of the children is unlikely to change whilst they await intervention and thus children and their families are subjected to further limbo waiting time; second, the dropout from the waiting list may disproportionately affect children who are offered appointments in clinics where there are higher levels of social disadvantage, thus exacerbating inequalities in the system. Currently, a suggested reasonable outcome of intervention is a 0.5 rating change in one domain of TOMs. Study findings suggest this is insufficiently stringent for a paediatric community clinic caseload. There is a need to evaluate spontaneous improvement which may occur in other TOM domains (i.e., Activity, Participation and Wellbeing) and to agree an appropriate change metric for a community paediatric caseload. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Individuals with developmental language disorder or Williams syndrome are reported to use more gestures than individuals with typical development. However, these two groups differ considerably in visuospatial and language skills, two skills that are hypothesized to shape gesture rate. Aims: We first examined whether children with both developmental language disorder and children Williams syndrome do indeed use more gestures. Our second aim was to disentangle the role of vocabulary and visuospatial skills in the use of supplementary gestures (i.e., containing unique information). To account for participant heterogeneity, analyses included both group comparisons and vocabulary and visuospatial skills at an individual level. As a third aim, the role of visuospatial skills was further examined in relation to gestures containing spatial content. Methods & Procedures: In a cross‐sectional group design, three participant groups watched and then retold a cartoon: children with typical development (n = 25), children with developmental language disorder (n = 25) and children/young people with Williams syndrome (n = 14). Their narrations were transcribed and hand gestures were coded based on gesture–speech integration (redundant, adds information to particular lexical items, gives information that is entirely absent from speech) and spatial content. Participants' expressive vocabulary and visuospatial skills were measured. Outcomes & Results: Between‐group comparisons showed that individuals with developmental language disorder or Williams syndrome did indeed use more gestures. Poisson loglinear modelling demonstrated that a relative higher use of supplementary gestures was determined by lower expressive vocabulary skills. Neither the group distinction nor visuospatial skills shaped the supplementary gesture rate nor spatial gesture rate. Conclusions & Implications: Regardless of neurodevelopmental condition or typical development, a higher use of supplementary gestures was influenced by expressive vocabulary skills. Children with lower vocabulary skills spontaneously capitalized on the multimodality of communication to express constituents that were not present in their verbal speech. This finding is a promising starting point for future gesture intervention studies examining whether implicit modelling of gesture use can encourage gestures even more in these children and if this allows them to achieve higher linguistic complexity. On a methodological note, the observed intra‐group skill variability demonstrates that group comparisons need to be complemented with correlational measures accounting for skills at an individual level. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Children with developmental language disorder and children with Williams syndrome are more inclined to use gestures than typically developing children. Research conducted in adults with typical development points towards the role of lexical and visuospatial skills in gesture use, but it is unclear how these skills shape gesture use in children with atypical development. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study compares the rate of gestures that convey meaning that is not expressed in speech between the three aforementioned populations. Novel is the inclusion of the group distinction, individual lexical skills, and visuospatial skills in one encompassing statistical model. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The inclination to use gestures that replace speech is related to lexical skills. Visuospatial skills do not seem to play a role and should not be considered as a factor when thinking about gesture intervention. Understanding how gestures relate to specific skills is a first step to understanding how gesture interventions can bolster language production. [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: Studies suggest swallow intervention programmes that incorporate visual biofeedback and motor programming principles can improve swallowing and quality of life for people with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD) and dysphagia. Few studies have examined outcomes using instrumentation. Aims: Using fibreoptic endoscopic examination of swallowing (FEES), this study examines the effectiveness of a neurorehabilitation intervention involving biofeedback via surface electromyography (sEMG) to improve swallowing in people with IPD, and to explore the feasibility of the intervention approach. Methods & Procedures: We recruited 12 participants with IPD and dysphagia. A total of 10 completed the study. Intervention was delivered for 1 h per day, 5 days per week, for 4 weeks (20 h). Swallowing tasks using sEMG biofeedback incorporated principles of motor learning and neuroplasticity. Instrumental and non‐instrumental assessment, including quality‐of‐life measures carried out at four different time points (two pre‐treatment and two post‐treatment). The final assessment was at 3 months post‐intervention. Outcome & Results: Statistically significant improvement (p < 0.05) in oral intake methods (95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.70–5.50) and in pharyngeal residue from saliva (95% CI = 2.14–3.15) and solids (95% CI = 2.4–3.5) post‐intervention were confirmed using FEES with improvements at 3 months. The intervention protocol was well tolerated. Participants reported positive change in saliva control and duration of mealtimes as well as unanticipated improvements in voice and cognitive attention. Conclusions & Implications: An intensive neurorehabilitation with biofeedback shows positive effects in improving swallow function in IPD. This protocol is feasible with amendments to inform a larger clinical trial. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Biofeedback has positive effects on increasing swallowing function and quality of life in people with IPD and dysphagia. sEMG is the most common method used to deliver swallowing biofeedback in this population. The quality of the evidence on the intervention, based on findings from a recent systematic review, is low. Included studies in this review were heterogeneous in terms of type and frequency of biofeedback, study design and outcome measures. The majority of outcome measures were subjective and higher quality studies to examine the efficacy of biofeedback using sEMG are needed. What this study adds: Recognizing the limitations of earlier studies, this within‐subject feasibility study examined the efficacy and effectiveness of an intensive biofeedback intervention using sEMG in a sample of people with dysphagia and IPD. Valid and reliable outcome measures were used and repeated after a 3‐month period. The feasibility of the methodological approach was also tested and a qualitative component was included in the study. Positive findings were evident. Qualitative information added new perspectives and provided direction for new outcomes to be included in future studies. This study helps to inform further research trials as well as clinical practice. Clinical implications of this study: This intensive intervention using principles of neuroplasticity and motor programming with sEMG biofeedback led not only to positive swallowing outcomes but also to unexpected benefits such as improved voice production and general attention skills. No adverse events were reported. Improvement in function was retained at 3 months post‐intervention. Despite the small sample size, participants described the benefits of the treatment, and enjoyed sEMG biofeedback tasks, especially using an sEMG game mode. This suggests that intensive biofeedback not only improved swallowing but also was acceptable to these participants. This intensive protocol has merit and is worth considering further in clinical practice. [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]

Background: There is limited evidence concerning the longer term language, literacy and cognitive skills of young adults with developmental language disorder (DLD). Studies that exist suggest continuing difficulties with language and reading, but abilities may change over time. Aims: This study aimed to examine the language, literacy and cognitive skills of young adults with and without DLD. Methods & Procedures: Data were used from the Manchester Language Study data set which was collected from a group of young adults with DLD (recruited originally at 7 years of age from language units—specialist educational resource bases). Participants were assessed on their language, literacy and cognitive functioning when they were aged 24. A comparison group of age‐matched peers (AMPs; also 24 years old) were also assessed. For language and cognition, change in scores between 16 and 24 years was also available for analysis. Finally, self‐rated measures of literacy difficulties were taken at 24 years for functional reading and writing. Outcome & Results: The results indicate that the young people with DLD in this sample continue to perform more poorly as a group on formal oral and written language tests. A small but significant minority of young adults with DLD also report functional reading and writing difficulties compared with AMPs despite reporting reading as often as their peer group. Compared with scores at 16 years of age, this subsample now appears to show slightly less risk of non‐verbal IQ difficulties, showing small but significant 'catch‐up' to AMPs. Conclusions & Implications: These preliminary data suggest that at least some individuals with DLD experience marked linguistic difficulties in adulthood, and that the pathways of language, literacy and cognition are not entirely parallel for this group. Continued support and awareness of challenges for young adults with DLD may be useful. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectIt is known that DLD is long term and persists into adulthood. There has recently been a body of work reporting on the well‐being of this population, as well as their employment, financial status and driving ability. However, there is very little information about language, literacy and cognitive skills beyond school age.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study presents data on language, literacy and cognition from a large cohort of young adults with DLD and their AMPs. In this sample, a large proportion of participants score low on language, with fewer scoring as impaired on literacy and cognition. A significant minority reports difficulties in functional reading. Preliminary analysis appears to suggest that while language development remains depressed, non‐verbal cognitive skills show some catch up over time.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Increased awareness and continued support for language, literacy and cognition may be useful for young adults with DLD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]