Search

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: 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: COVID‐19 necessitated emergency telepractice for student‐led speech‐language therapy clinical practicals in training institutions, with limited preparation and evidence‐based guidelines. Beyond the pandemic, practitioners and university training sites are likely to continue to offer telepractice necessitating thorough preparation for telepractice services underpinned by a comprehensive understanding of the complexities involved in online therapy. Aims: Adopting realist evaluation principles, our aim in this paper was to explore broadly what works and does not work in a set of student‐led telepractice sessions in a diverse, resource‐limited context. The broader goal of this project was to provide evidence‐based support to enhance the efficiency and success of telepractice sessions in student clinical training contexts. Methods & Procedures: We used qualitative observational methods with reflexive thematic analysis to analyse 28 video recordings and 61 observation notes of student‐led paediatric telepractice sessions from a South African university clinic as part of a pilot study. Outcomes & Results: We identified four overarching considerations for student‐led telepractice: (1) additional, specific preparation is required, (2) with greater management of technology and adaptation of tasks, especially during times of poor connectivity; (3) telepractice relies heavily on caregiver input and collaboration; and (4) promoting engagement online, holding a client's attention, building rapport and offering reinforcement are critical skills that are complicated by the lack of face‐to‐face contact. Conclusions & Implications: Our findings indicate that telepractice pedagogy needs to be explicitly taught and students require practical assistance as they learn how to use this service delivery approach effectively. There are some aspects peculiar to telepractice that require unique consideration and planning, especially in contexts where service providers and users may be unfamiliar with this form of service provision. The findings of this pilot study can be used by clinical educators and student clinicians to enhance clinical training opportunities involving telepractice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Many speech‐language therapy (SLT) student clinicians had to transition quickly to telepractice service provision during COVID‐19 with limited existing guidelines and support, especially in contexts where teletherapy is typically non‐existent or difficult to access. Although there is some literature available on experiences of telepractice, there is very little evidence‐based research which explores the mechanics of such sessions in real‐time and which offers practical support to student clinicians and clinical educators engaging in this mode of service delivery. What this study adds: This pilot study examined video‐recorded, student‐led, paediatric, speech‐language teletherapy sessions to understand challenges and considerations involved in using telepractice as a clinical training tool. Findings show that additional preparation for telepractice sessions is required, particularly in contexts of poor digital literacy; students must learn to manage technology, especially when connectivity poses a challenge, and adapt therapy tasks for online work with clients; telepractice relies heavily on caregiver input and collaboration, more so than in in‐person consultations, and this relationship requires careful management; and promoting engagement online, holding a client's attention, building rapport and offering reinforcement are critical yet challenging skills in telepractice. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Our findings highlight a need to teach telepractice pedagogy explicitly and support students practically in learning how to provide therapy effectively via this mode of service delivery. Observational methods for studying practices in recorded telepractice sessions can be used as part of a reflective approach to clinical training. Using already available data allowed us to unpack the 'messy reality' of clinical training using telepractice. [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: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) describes a group of language‐led dementias. PPAs are complex, diverse and difficult to diagnose, and therefore conventional models of aphasia and dementia treatment do not meet their needs. The research evidence on intervention for PPA is developing, but to date there are only a few case studies exploring the experiences of people with PPA (PwPPA) themselves. Aims: To explore the experiences and opinions of PwPPA and their communication partners (CPs) to understand how speech and language therapy (SLT) services can better meet their needs. Methods & Procedures: A qualitative research approach was used whereby PwPPA and their friends or family members were recruited to participate in focus groups, via advertisements in the Rare Dementia Support PPA group newsletters. Consenting participants were allocated to attend one of four focus groups hosted on an online video conferencing platform. Participants were asked about their communication difficulties, and how SLT could address these needs. All meetings were transcribed, and data were examined using reflexive thematic analysis. Outcomes & Results: Six PwPPA and 14 CPs representing all three PPA variants and mixed PPA participated in the focus groups. Four main themes were identified during the analysis of the focus group discussions: (1) CPs' burden, (2) adjusting to the diagnosis, (3) communication abilities and difficulties and (4) beyond language. A further 10 subthemes were identified. Conclusions & Implications: This study provides a greater understanding of the experiences and needs of PwPPA and their families in relation to SLT. This work underlines the importance of a person‐centred approach that considers the broader needs of both the PwPPA and the people around them. This will enable service providers to deliver SLT that meets the needs of PwPPA and their families and will also inform future research in this field. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: We know that PwPPA can maintain or even make improvements in word retrieval and speech fluency with SLT exercises. There is also developing evidence of the benefits of interventions such as CP training, communication aid support and other functional interventions. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study provides an understanding of the experiences and opinions of people living with PPA and their families in relation to SLT. Results demonstrate that PwPPA and their families have to navigate a complex journey, identifying strategies to support communication but also the influence of personality and other cognitive symptoms. SLT was useful, but not always available. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This study will enable service providers to better plan, justify funding for and delivery of SLT that will meet the needs of PwPPA and their families. Most importantly this work underlines the importance of a person‐centred approach, incorporating the broader needs of the person with PPA and those around them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Measuring, assessing and managing outcomes in school practice environments is difficult due to the complex nature of school communities as well as the recent shift in service‐delivery models towards tiered approaches. In tiered approaches, multiple levels of service are offered to better match students' needs. Each level of service may require different outcomes and management techniques. Research to date on outcomes has focused on measuring outcomes in medical settings, leaving a substantive gap in the literature regarding practice in schools. Aims: The first aim was to explore how school‐based speech–language therapists approached outcomes management as their clinical programmes transitioned to tiered service‐delivery models The second aim was to describe the successes and challenges in outcomes management reported by clinicians in this context. Methods & Procedures: A secondary deductive‐inductive content analysis was performed using qualitative interviews with 24 clinical managers and senior therapists from schools across Ontario, Canada. Using a framework of outcomes measurement, assessment and management in schools based on previous research studies, data were grouped into broad categories deductively, and then the content of each category was further explored using inductive coding. Iterative peer debriefing and reflexive journaling were key strategies to increase the trustworthiness of the results. Findings & Results: Participants reported measuring and qualitatively assessing seven key outcomes for school‐based practice. These included: (1) student progress and achievement, (2) student participation and inclusion in the school community, (3) stakeholder perspectives, (4) 'buy‐in', (5) expanded capacities, (6) responsiveness to needs and (7) accountability to systems. Participants reported more challenges than successes in outcomes management during this transition to tiered services. Challenges were attributed to idiosyncratic organizational barriers, the transition to tiered models and the philosophy of working within the educational system. Conclusions & Implications: School‐based speech–language therapists measure, assess and manage multiple outcomes relevant to school‐based practice in tiered service‐delivery models. Many challenges remain. Solutions to support meaningful, systematic and proactive outcomes management in schools should address the broader set of outcomes relevant to tiered service‐delivery models and the unique practice context of the educational system, while remaining responsive to idiosyncratic organizational factors. Sustained clinical–research collaboration and knowledge exchange is recommended. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Systematic, proactive collection and interpretation of outcomes has long been encouraged within speech–language therapy. However, implementing outcomes management in clinical practice remains a substantial challenge. Additionally, research on outcomes to date has focused on medical practice environments, to the exclusion of school‐based practice. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Outcomes management is valued in school practice environments; however, the current repertoire of techniques for outcomes management are a poor match for school‐based practice. Clinicians in schools would benefit from the development of contextually relevant, meaningful and feasible outcomes management tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) is a patient‐reported outcome measure (PROM) designed to measure the extent of interference, or difficulty, experienced by adults with communication disorders participating in their day‐to‐day communication activities. To date, there is limited evidence regarding sensitivity of the CPIB for capturing change with intervention in people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD). Aims: The purpose of this study was to examine the following measurement properties of the CPIB in PwPD who received community‐based, standard care, speech‐language therapy focusing on motor speech concerns: Change over time between treatment and observation groups, comparison to patient‐defined ideal and satisfactory targets, comparison of static short form to computerised adaptive testing (CAT), comparison of self to proxy‐rated scores, and comparison to other common PROMs. Methods and Procedures: Forty‐six PwPD (20 treatment/26 observation) completed data collection upon enrolment (pre‐treatment) and 6 months later. In addition to the CPIB, PROMs included the Voice Handicap Index 10‐item short form (VHI‐10), PROMIS Global Health‐Related Quality of Life, Levels of Speech Usage, self‐rated speech severity, and Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 (PHQ‐9). Participants also engaged in qualitative interviews. Forty‐four family members completed proxy CPIB ratings. Outcomes and Results: There were no significant differences between treatment and observation groups on the CPIB pre‐treatment, but there were significant differences post‐treatment. The differences appeared to be largely due to significant gains in the treatment group. No participants reached their ideal CPIB target, and few reached their satisfactory target. Static CPIB short form and CAT scores were not significantly different, with an average of five CAT items administered per participant. Overall group similarities between patient and proxy scores may have obscured wide variability across individual patient‐proxy pairs. Associations between CPIB and VHI‐10, health‐related quality of life, self‐reported speech severity, and depression ranged from weak to moderate. Conclusions and Implications: The CPIB appears to be sensitive to capturing change with intervention, and similar results are obtained with the static short form and CAT formats. One clinical caution is that even with gains observed in the treatment group, no participants obtained their ideal communicative participation goals, and few obtained a satisfactory level of communicative participation. Thus, while current interventions are beneficial, they may not meet the full range of clients' communication needs. While responding to the CPIB through a proxy rater may be feasible, caution is warranted due to concerns about maintaining the autonomy of PwPD. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: The communication disorders associated with Parkinson's disease (PD) can have a negative impact on quality of life and life participation as measured by patient (or person)‐reported outcome measures (PROMs). The Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) is one PROM available to use with adults with communication disorders. However, little is known about whether the CPIB captures changes in communicative participation as a result of standard care treatment for people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD). Use of computerised adaptive testing (CAT), proxy report and comparison to targeted participation outcomes have not been explored. What this study adds to existing knowledge: As a result of this study, we know that the CPIB captured differences between treatment and observation groups after community‐based, standard care speech therapy intervention focusing on motor speech production in PwPD. Static short form and CAT scores did not differ significantly, so the CAT option provides better efficiency requiring, on average, five items to administer compared to the 10‐item short form. Proxy and PwPD scores did not differ as a group, but wide variability was noted. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The CPIB may be a clinically sensitive instrument for capturing changes in communicative participation after treatment. No participants met their ideal CPIB target, and few reached their satisfactory target, suggesting that while current interventions contribute to gains in communicative participation, there are still unmet needs that may call for support and interventions addressing the more complex array of factors affecting communicative participation outcomes for PwPD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence‐based speech therapy involves the integration of (1) the scientific evidence for therapy with (2) the perspectives of clinicians concerning therapy and (3) the perspectives of patients about therapy. The cleft literature has already paid attention to the first two cornerstones of evidence‐based speech therapy. Much less is known about how children perceive cleft speech therapy. Aims: The purpose of the current qualitative study was to investigate the perceptions, emotions and expectations of Flemish‐speaking Dutch children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP ± L), aged 5–12 years, with regard to the speech therapy they receive. In this study, a focus was made on speech therapy to eliminate compensatory cleft speech errors. Methods & Procedures: Six children with a CP ± L, aged between 5 and 12 years, were included in this study. Child‐friendly semi‐structured interviews were conducted using a participatory, art‐based qualitative approach. This means that the 'play and puppets technique' and 'draw–write and photo‐elicitation technique' were used to guide the children through the interviews. Data derived from these interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Trustworthiness of the data was achieved by applying researcher triangulation, negative case analysis and an audit trail. Outcomes & Results: Analyses of the interviews revealed three major themes of importance to the children: (1) treatment values, (2) treatment practices and (3) treatment outcomes. Each theme was divided into different subthemes. The theme 'treatment values' consisted of the subthemes expectations and emotions around therapy and interference with daily living. Information flow, therapy content, confirmation and rewards, parents' attendance, therapy intensity, and homework were subthemes of the major theme 'treatment practices'. The theme 'treatment outcomes' was divided into two subthemes, namely speech improvement and peers' reactions. Conclusions & Implications: Most children had positive attitudes towards speech therapy: it was 'something they liked' and 'something fun'. If children had negative attitudes they were related to having a fear of making mistakes during therapy. Children had clear expectations of the purpose of speech therapy. Speech therapy should 'help' improve their speech and make it more understandable to others. The children in this sample made some suggestions to decrease the experienced burden related to speech therapy. The results of this study will help to better tailor speech therapy programmes to the needs and experiences of children with a CP ± L. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Evidence‐based speech therapy involves the integration of (1) the scientific evidence for therapy with (2) the perspectives of clinicians concerning therapy and (3) the perspectives of patients and their families about therapy. The cleft literature has already paid attention to the first two cornerstones of evidence‐based speech therapy. Different studies investigated the perspectives of SLPs and parents with regard to cleft palate speech therapy. However, much less is known about the children's own experiences with and perceptions around this speech therapy. What this study adds to existing knowledge: This study used a qualitative research design to investigate the perceptions, emotions and expectations of children with a cleft (lip and) palate, aged 5–12 years, with regard to the speech therapy they receive. Speech therapy needed to focus on the elimination of compensatory speech errors. This study provides knowledge on the speech therapy‐related experiences of children with a cleft palate. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Children in this sample made some concrete suggestions to decrease the experienced burden related to cleft speech therapy, for example, integration of school work during therapy sessions and practising on the level of spontaneous speech. The results of this study help us to better tailor speech therapy programmes to the needs and experiences of children with a CP ± L. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]