Search

Background: Maintenance of speech outcomes following speech‐language therapy (SLT) in Parkinson's disease (PD) is an unmet expectation of people with PD (PWPD) and poorly defined in SLT practice. PD Check‐In, a model for supported self‐managed maintenance of speech following Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT) LOUD was investigated. Aims: To investigate the impact of the semi‐structured component of PD Check‐In on the adoption of self‐management concepts and behaviours and the identification of facilitators, barriers and strategies for speech maintenance by PWPD over 24 months post‐treatment. Methods and procedure: Following LSVT LOUD, 16 PWPD participated in individual PD Check‐In semi‐structured discussions with a SLT at 6 and 12 weeks, and 6, 12 and 24 months post treatment. A two‐stage qualitative content analysis was applied: directed content analysis using categories from the theoretical framework of PD Check‐In followed by inductive content analysis to identify subcategories. Outcomes and results: Statements from PWPD indicated adoption of seven concepts of self‐management across participants and across time. Six concepts from the theoretical framework of PD Check‐In (partnerships, self‐reflection, maintenance barriers and facilitators, revision of LSVT LOUD skill, goal setting and maintenance strategies), and one new category, participation, emerged from the analysis. Self‐reflection, maintenance facilitators and barriers and participation were most prevalent in discussions. PWPD identified facilitators, barriers and strategies for maintenance across time points. Conclusions and implications: Statements from PWPD indicated a positive impact of SLT‐supported self‐management of speech using self‐tailored strategies for sustainable maintenance according to their individual circumstances and needs. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: People with Parkinson's disease (PWPD) have expressed their need for speech‐language therapy (SLT) services that are accessible for the duration of the condition and responsive to their expectation of maintaining speech following treatment. Outcomes for maintenance of the treatment effect following Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT) LOUD are variable. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study presents the outcomes of five PD Check‐In interventions delivered in semi‐structured discussions between PWPD and a SLT over 24 months following LSVT LOUD for the development of self‐management skills and behaviours. PWPD adopted self‐management positively using self‐tailored strategies for sustainable maintenance according to their individual circumstances and needs. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: PWPD responded positively to the individual development of self‐management skills and behaviours over time. Individuality and flexible responsivity are features of PD Check‐In which resonate with PWPD and speak to SLT supported self‐managed maintenance of speech as a long‐term model for PD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early language delay is exacerbated by social disadvantage. Factors such as parents' low levels of literacy, confidence and self‐perception can affect the capacity to act on advice received, critical to empowerment. Methods used to achieve successful health outcomes in socially disadvantaged clinical populations may need enhancing. Aims: To compare the impact of standard parent‐based intervention (PBI) to enhanced PBI for young children with speech, language and communication needs (SCLN) and their families living in more socially disadvantaged populations. Methods and Procedures: A multicentre clustered blind randomised controlled trial was used to compare the effect of parent‐based group interventions to improve early language development with children (mean age 27.5 months) from more socially disadvantaged populations with an expressive vocabulary of 40 or less single words. Intervention sessions were delivered by a speech and language therapist, over a 20‐week period. Participants received one of two interventions: (1) Standard Care – indirect group PBI – (PBI) (2) Enhanced Care: indirect group enhanced PBI – (EPBI). Both standardised and non‐standardised measures were used as outcomes. Parent engagement in the intervention was captured through analysis of attendance and the Parent Activation Measure – Speech & Language Therapy (PAM‐SLT) (Insignia Health, 2014). The PAM measures a person's knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their own health and well‐being (NHS England, 2018). In this study, activation referred to parents' knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their child's language development. Outcomes and Results: One hundred fifty‐five participants were randomised at baseline. Children in both groups made significant improvements in the outcome on MacArthur‐Bates Communicative Development Inventories Sentence Length, from pre‐intervention to post‐intervention and 6 months post‐intervention (p < 0.05). Changes in vocabulary and expressive language skills were more equivocal, showing wide variation in confidence intervals for both groups. Where parents attended at least one intervention session almost all effect sizes were in favour of the EPBI intervention. Parents' activation levels significantly increased for both groups (EPBI p < 0.001, PBI p = 0.003), with a moderate effect size in favour of EPBI (Hedges' G 0.37, confidence interval –0.02 to 0.76), although wide variation was found. Conclusions and Implications: This trial provides some evidence of facilitating the language development of children with SLCN from more socially disadvantaged areas through supporting caregivers. However, we found variation in outcomes; some children made excellent progress, whilst others did not. Further exploration of parent engagement and its relationship to child language outcomes will be valuable to understanding more about mechanisms of change in interventions that involve parents. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) have a knock‐on effect on emotional well‐being, school readiness, literacy and school attainment, putting children at increased risk of long‐term consequences such as poor literacy, mental health problems and unemployment. In disadvantaged areas, the prevalence of language difficulties is higher than elsewhere. Factors such as parents' low levels of literacy, confidence and self‐perception can affect the capacity to act on advice received, critical to empowerment. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Children with SLCN from more socially disadvantaged areas can make improvements in their language development through parent intervention, although wide individual variation was found. There was some evidence that children achieve better outcomes with EPBI, which employed an interagency collaborative approach. Parent's engagement (activation levels) increased significantly over time with intervention, with the increase twice as big for EPBI. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This trial provides some evidence that it is possible to facilitate the language development of children from more socially disadvantaged areas through supporting their caregivers. Further research would be useful to determine whether increases in parent engagement are related to adherence to intervention and change in child outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Sociometric studies and adult reports have established that children with Language Disorder (LD) are at risk of peer relationship difficulties. However, we have limited knowledge of how children with LD understand friendship, whom they deem as a good or bad friend, and what role their friendship concepts play in their relationships with peers. This exploratory study aimed to conduct a qualitative investigation into the friendship concepts that children with LD hold and to explore their strategies for making friends. Methods: We conducted multiple, art‐informed interviews on the topic of friendship with 14 children with LD at the age of 6–8 years. Participating children were based in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. They attended enhanced provision, specific speech and language classes and mainstream classrooms. We used framework analysis to map children's responses to Selman's (1979) developmental model of interpersonal understanding, which espouses a theory of children's social development within the context of peer relationships. Results: The understanding of friendship formation in children with LD varied from physical presence to mutual support and sharing. Children's ideas about a good/bad friend represented the lowest developmental stage. Participants from the mainstream classroom demonstrated the highest stages of interpersonal understanding. Children with LD did not mention their language abilities as a barrier to making friends. Conclusion: There are limited studies exploring friendship directly from children with LD, and this study provides insights into this gap, by utilising art‐informed interviews. Children's immature understanding of a good/bad friend points towards a potential susceptibility to false friends, which we suggest needs further empirical validation. We also found that children with LD did not pay attention to their language difficulties when making friends, which raises questions about the ways diagnoses are shared with children. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Children with Language Disorder (LD) are at risk of peer relationship difficulties. Studies to date are based on sociometrics and adult reports. Only a few studies employ participatory approaches to research with children, directly engaging children with LD when exploring their friendships What this paper adds: This paper directly asks children with LD about their understanding of friendship and strategies for making friends.Physical proximity and play are important to children.s understanding of friendship especially in recognising good and bad friends. This indicates potential reasons for children with LD being susceptible to false friendsAdditionally, children with LD do not perceive language and communication as a barrier to making friends. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Concepts around friendship and good/bad friends should be routinely assessed and targeted (if appropriate) in interventions. The study highlights the need to continue discussing practices around sharing diagnoses with children with LD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The role of participatory health research (PHR) is increasingly acknowledged by funding bodies, researchers and civil society globally; however, it continues to be under‐represented in the speech and language therapy (SLT) research literature. This collaborative research approach is associated with the increased application of research evidence, and the generation of positive impacts in practice, policy, health systems and society. Aims: To increase researchers' and other participatory partners' understanding of PHR, and to demonstrate its applicability to research in the SLT field. Methods & Procedures: This aim is achieved through a discussion on PHR, its principles, benefits and challenges, and the evaluation of its impact. A recently developed evaluation framework to support the implementation of best engagement practices is examined, and recommendations for how this framework can be used to plan and evaluate engagement in participatory stuttering research is presented. Main contribution: This paper serves as an important conversation on the value of PHR to SLT research, and presents guidance to support its increased implementation in this research field. Conclusions & Implications: Conclusions & Implications: PHR remains an under‐represented research approach in the SLT literature, despite increasing evidence demonstrating its effectiveness and value. It offers a potential solution to the research–practice gap, and challenges the ongoing research hierarchies by democrating the process of knowledge production. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: PHR is increasingly attracting the attention of funders, researchers and decision‐makers due to a growing body of evidence in support of this collaborative research approach. Despite its potential to bridge the research–practice gap, PHR remains significantly under‐represented in the SLT research literature. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge: This paper discusses the principles, benefits, challenges and impact evaluation of PHR. A recently developed evaluation framework for supporting the implementation of best engagement practices is examined. A demonstration of how this framework can be used to plan and evaluate engagement in participatory stuttering research is presented. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Speech and language therapists play a key role in PHR, as co‐researchers contributing essential context‐based knowledge. It is therefore imperative that they understand the principles and practices of this approach in order to maximize their input in future participatory partnerships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People who have communication difficulties may benefit from using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Understanding and measuring outcomes from the use of AAC is an important part of evaluating the impact of devices and services. Outcome measurement needs to reflect the changing nature of the impact of using AAC on an individual's ability to participate in activities of daily life. There is a limited understanding of the concepts that should inform the evaluation of outcomes from AAC device provision, nor how people's expectations from AAC may change over time. Aims: To inform the development of a patient‐reported outcome measure for AAC by understanding more about people's expectations from AAC and how these change over time. Methods & Procedures: A longitudinal qualitative research study was designed and carried out with seven participants over a period of 2 years. Participants were recruited from a regional specialist assessment service for AAC in the south‐west of the UK. Four semi‐structured interviews were carried out: (1) before assessment for AAC, (2) after assessment, (3) directly after provision of an AAC device and (4) between 6 and 12 months after provision. An original analytic method was used in this study that built on the principles of longitudinal interpretative phenomenology analysis, applied with a dialogic theoretical lens. This approach enabled the inclusion of a range of multimodal and embodied data collected to this study and allowed the research team to draw out salient themes across the cohort group while attending to the influence of time and context on experience. Outcomes & Results: The results confirm and extend the three core concepts that were used to guide analysis: changes; contexts; future possibilities. The contextual and temporal influences on outcomes attainable from AAC for this cohort were also identified and illustrated through cross‐case comparison. Deeper, analytic, and conceptual engagement with theory, which was then applied to analysis of the data, provided methodological rigour in the study. The results enhance our understanding of people's hopes and expectations from AAC and how these change over time. Conclusions & Implications: This qualitative longitudinal research study provides new insights into the journeys of people who experience communication disability, and the shifting nature of their sense of identity as they engage with, and learn from using, AAC. The study is significant as it attends to the dynamic nature of experience and how contextual and experiential factors influence people's hopes and expectations from AAC. The paper presents an original application of longitudinal qualitative research methodology with people who use AAC which can be further applied and tested in the field of communication disability research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: We did not know the impact that time has on the concepts that have been identified to represent important outcomes from AAC. The existing concepts used to define outcomes from AAC were not adequately conceptualized to develop a patient‐reported outcome measure. This study sought to extend our knowledge about outcomes from AAC. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge: This study adds to the methodological toolkit available for qualitative inquiry in the field of communication disability research by presenting a longitudinal qualitative research methodology. It adds depth to our understanding of the concepts that underpin outcomes from AAC and highlights the dynamic nature of contexts and how this influences desired outcomes. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This longitudinal qualitative research study provides a broader perspective on the experience of getting AAC. It will enable clinicians to better navigate the contextual and transitionary factors that influence people's experience of acquiring AAC devices. The enhanced concepts described will also support clinical conversations that consider the wider facets of communication and what AAC can add to existing communicative tool kits beyond getting a message across. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Eating, drinking and swallowing (EDS) difficulties are important to identify early. Awareness of EDS changes starts with those living with dementia or their family carers. However, little is known about early identification from the perspective of people with dementia. Aim: The aim of this study was to understand the experience of EDS by people living with dementia in their own home. Methods: Published evidence pertaining to EDS difficulties in dementia was used to inform an online semi‐structured interview guide. Four people living with dementia and a third‐sector Empowerment Lead were invited to become co‐researchers. People living with dementia and their carers were invited to be interviewed. We enquired about their past and present experiences, and future expected changes in EDS, information needs, opinions on early problem identification, and lifestyle modifications following onset of EDS difficulty. Narrative concepts of heroes and villains in their 'stories' were identified. Responses were subjected to framework analysis informed by narrative enquiry. Results: Seven people living with dementia and five family carers were interviewed. The overarching theme was a 'missed connection' between EDS difficulty and dementia. Where EDS difficulties were identified, 'compensatory changes' and a need for 'access to information' were noted. Conclusions: The connection between potential EDS difficulties and a dementia diagnosis may not be made, even though EDS changes were recognised by people living with dementia and their family carers. This may be explained by behaviours that mask problems or allow individuals to cope or compensate. Reduced awareness may also be due to inadequate access to information and lack of specialist services. If the connection between dementia and EDS difficulty is missed it could further delay access to support services. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: The prevalence of dementia is increasing and is expected to affect 9% of the population by 2040. EDS difficulties are common in people living with dementia and predispose to poorer outcomes. Better awareness of EDS changes early in the disease process of dementia or at preclinical stages can identify individuals at risk and allow for intervention prior to advanced EDS difficulties developing. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This paper reports the perspective of people living with dementia and family carers and provides insights into experiences of EDS and the challenges faced and identifies commonalities. The connection between potential EDS difficulties and dementia is missed despite various changes reported by both people living with dementia and their family carers, who tend to make compensatory lifestyle changes without support. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Lack of awareness of the connection between potential EDS difficulties and dementia may arise due to inadequate access to information to support people living with dementia and their family carers. Access to such information is needed and the quality assurance of information from reputable sources is important to people living with dementia. There is a need for greater service user awareness of signs of EDS difficulty and how to access specialist services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research is beginning to shed light on the practices employed by speech‐language therapists (SLTs) for the management of acquired dysarthria. However, studies that explore SLTs' satisfaction with the effectiveness of current therapies and their interest in new treatment methods for this population have not been carried out. One potential new method is neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES): the pool of evidence for its use in rehabilitation is increasing, yet it has not been widely explored for use with dysarthria. Aim: To extend the understanding of acquired dysarthria management practices employed by SLTs across the globe and determine their satisfaction with current therapy options. To explore their interest in using NMES with this population. Methods and Procedures: A cross‐sectional international online survey was developed and disseminated to SLTs working with adults with acquired dysarthria through international professional associations. The survey collected information on demographic characteristics, dysarthria management practices, satisfaction with treatment effectiveness and interest in and knowledge of NMES. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, and quantitative content analysis. Outcomes and Results: A total of 211 SLTs (North America, 48.8%; Europe, 36%; Asia, 8.1%; Oceania, 5.7%; Africa, 0.9%; South America, 0.5%) completed the survey in full. Management practices varied considerably. There was a clear preference for informal assessments, mainly oral‐motor examinations, focusing on body functions and structures. The majority of respondents rejected the use of non‐speech oral motor exercises as a clinical or carryover exercise. Variable satisfaction with current speech subsystem treatments was noted; however, overall, there was a general dissatisfaction. Whilst a strong interest in the use of NMES for dysarthria was evidenced, it was noted that most SLTs lacked fundamental knowledge of NMES principles and application. Conclusion: SLTs' management practices and satisfaction with acquired dysarthria treatments differed substantially. Investigations of the potential use of NMES for dysarthria treatment are of interest. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Recent country‐specific surveys have explored speech‐language therapists' (SLTs') assessment and intervention practices for acquired dysarthria. These studies indicate that although clinical management for this speech disorder mainly involves informal assessment tools and impairment‐focused treatment, communication beyond the impairment, such as the activity and participation domains, is also frequently assessed and treated. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: The majority of SLTs are dissatisfied with the overall benefits of current acquired dysarthria treatment. Phonatory, respiration and speech rate therapies are perceived to be more effective than prosody, articulation and resonance treatments. Despite a general lack of theoretical knowledge, most SLTs are interested in neuromuscular electrical stimulation treatment for acquired dysarthria. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: New, evidence‐based treatments are needed for SLTs to be confident in the effectiveness of their acquired dysarthria treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech and language therapists (SLTs) share a collective goal of ensuring that adults with cognitive–communication disorders (CCD) due to acquired brain injuries (ABI) attain their highest possible level of participation and satisfaction in family, community, social, work and academic communications through evidence‐based interventions. While there is a considerable evidence base to support SLT cognitive–communication interventions, there are also numerous barriers to its implementation. Aims: The first aim is to describe the development of a comprehensive knowledge translation tool that synthesizes evidence‐based practice recommendations for SLT cognitive–communication interventions across the care continuum. The second aim is to critically analyse the barriers to implementation of these interventions and to explore how this knowledge translation tool might assist in overcoming these challenges. Methods & Procedures: We developed a map of 148 clinical practice recommendations extracted from 129 reviews and guidelines called the Cognitive–Communication Evidence Application for SLTs (CCEAS‐Map). The process of developing the CCEAS‐Map included: (1) examination of implementation science frameworks to inform knowledge tool creation; (2) search and synthesis of the evidence provided in reviews and guidelines that met specific criteria; (3) development of a framework to critically analyse and categorize the barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of these clinical recommendations; (4) consultation with potential end users of the CCEAS‐Map, including 16 expert SLTs and eight persons with lived experience (PWLE), regarding the tool's construction, barriers and facilitators to implementation, and the potential of the CCEAS‐Map to address evidence–practice gaps; and (5) refining the CCEAS‐Map based on expert input. Main Contribution: To our knowledge this is the first synthesis of all available clinical recommendations for SLT cognitive–communication interventions for ABI, across all severities of injury, stages along the continuum of care, and areas of CCD practice. The paper presents a novel approach to analysing knowledge–practice gaps: drawing on implementation science tools, analysing barriers and facilitators, and collaborating with end users in designing a knowledge translation tool. Conclusions & Implications: The CCEAS‐Map provides a comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence in a format that can facilitate clinical application of the evidence, provide education for all stakeholders, serve as a basis for CCD pathway development, support researcher–clinician collaboration and encourage advocacy at the system level. As a knowledge translation tool, the CCEAS‐Map can promote the availability of SLT services and has the potential to ultimately improve the lives of those with CCD. What this paper Adds: What is already known on this subject: A great deal is known about cognitive–communication deficits incurred after ABI, including their impact on daily functioning, optimal methods for sensitive and ecologically valid assessment, and the efficacy of various speech–language therapy interventions along the care continuum. However, considerable constraints remain that interfere with the application of this evidence to daily SLT practice. A need was identified to develop a knowledge translation tool to help close these evidence–practice gaps. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study describes the development of the CCEAS‐Map, a critical synthesis of 129 reviews and guidelines, leading to 148 evidence‐based clinical recommendations, which can be used to guide SLT cognitive–communication practice and education, as well as clinical pathway development, and advocacy for systemic changes and other healthcare policy improvements. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The CCEAS‐Map is a clinical knowledge translation tool designed to guide cognitive–communication interventions by linking practice recommendations directly to the current evidence. This paper also offers insights into barriers to SLT intervention across the care continuum and strategies for improving implementation of cognitive–communication best practices, to improve the lives of those living with ABI related disabilities. [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: Factors influencing the implementation of communication partner training (CPT) with familiar partners of people with aphasia (PWA) have previously been documented using disparate approaches. To date there has been no synthesis of these factors using a common theoretical framework. Investigating CPT implementation factors using a common theoretical framework may further our understanding of universal barriers and guide future development of tailored, theoretically informed implementation strategies. Aims: (1) To determine the perceived and/or observed barriers and facilitators to implementing CPT with familiar partners of adults with aphasia; (2) to map extracted barriers and facilitators to a common theoretical framework; (3) to synthesize extracted barriers and facilitators; and (4) to identify potential implementation strategies to address the most frequently identified barriers and facilitators. Methods & Procedures: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science) were systematically searched in April 2021. Empirical qualitative and/or quantitative research studies reporting barriers/facilitators to speech–language therapists (SLTs) implementing CPT with familiar partners of adults with aphasia were included. The search was limited to English or French articles with no date limit applied. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Mixed‐Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). A framework and content analysis was then conducted to extract and synthesize the implementation factors in alignment with the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), followed by a theoretically informed mapping exercise to identify potential implementation strategies. Results & Main contribution: The database searches yielded 2115 studies. Following screening, 17 studies were included in the review. Overall, the included studies had good methodological quality. Extracted implementation factors were classified as barriers, facilitators or mixed (i.e., both) and aligned with 13 of the 14 TDF domains, plus two additional domains: 'carer perspectives on the CPT intervention' and 'patient/carer characteristics'. Synthesized data revealed eight key theoretical domains: Environmental context and resources; Social influences; Beliefs about consequences; Skills; Memory, attention and decision‐making; Knowledge; Beliefs about capabilities; and Reinforcement. Within each domain, the research team identified common categories and developed illustrative examples of theoretically informed implementation strategies. Conclusions & Implications: This systematic review and theory‐informed synthesis of previously reported CPT implementation factors enabled the identification of key barriers to SLTs delivering this best practice. This led to proposed implementation strategies that should be validated, refined and evaluated in future research involving stakeholders who have contextual understanding of implementing CPT. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: CPT of familiar partners of PWA is an effective intervention that is inconsistently used in clinical settings. Factors influencing CPT implementation have previously been identified, but using disparate approaches and frameworks. A synthesis of these factors articulated around a common framework is currently not available. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This paper provides a theory‐informed synthesis of previously reported barriers and facilitators to SLTs implementing CPT with familiar partners of PWA. It highlights key factors influencing the uptake of this best practice and includes suggestion of implementation strategies to address them. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The key influencing factors and proposed implementation strategies reported in this paper may support stakeholders in the future design of tailored and theoretically informed implementation strategies aiming to improve the delivery of familiar CPT in their setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Online knowledge translation (KT) approaches are becoming increasingly prevalent within healthcare due to their accessibility and facilitation of international support networks. Online platforms enable timely and far‐reaching dissemination of current evidence and best‐practice recommendations. Although there is potential to improve the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines, it is essential to consider the acceptability of online approaches to healthcare professionals to ensure their successful integration within everyday clinical settings. Aims: To establish the prospective acceptability of a theoretically informed online intervention for speech pathologists, Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice, that aims to facilitate the implementation of aphasia best practice. Methods & Procedures: A mixed‐methods multinational electronic survey based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) completed by aphasia researchers and clinicians. Outcomes & Results: A total of 43 participants completed the survey with 91% (n = 39) indicating that they would use Aphasia Nexus. Understanding the intervention and how it works (intervention coherence as per the TFA) was the key factor influencing the likelihood of integration within everyday clinical practice. Participants identified potential areas where the intervention could influence service change and also recommended further design and content changes to improve the intervention. Conclusions & Implications: Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable platform for further feasibility testing in the form of a pilot trial within an Australian‐based health service. The study progresses the theory of TFA as it was a valuable framework facilitating the identification of prominent factors influencing acceptability. The study also informs further intervention refinements in preparation for the next stage of research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Online strategies have the potential to enhance KT and promote the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines. An online intervention, however, can only be effective if implemented well. For this reason, it is essential to establish the acceptability of online interventions to the intended recipients and therefore increase the likelihood of successful implementation. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study used a theoretically based framework to establish the acceptability of an online implementation intervention, Aphasia Nexus, to multinational aphasia clinicians and researchers. It demonstrated the value in identifying the prominent factors influencing acceptability to inform further intervention refinements and warrant continuing research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Speech pathologists should use online platforms to drive the implementation of best practice on an international scale. It is important for clinicians to have an in‐depth understanding of online interventions and how they work to enhance their successful uptake into routine clinical practice. Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable online platform for implementing best practice in aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increasing attention is paid to the effectiveness of high‐intensity speech intervention in children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP±L). It is, however, unknown if high‐intensity intervention is acceptable to the intervention recipients. Parents have an integral role in supporting their children with intervention highlighting the importance of intervention acceptability to parents. Aims: To compare the retrospective acceptability of high‐intensity speech intervention (10 1‐hr speech therapy sessions divided over 2 weeks) with the retrospective acceptability of low‐intensity speech intervention (10 1‐hr speech therapy sessions divided over 10 weeks) for children with a CP±L from the parents' point of view. Methods & Procedures: Twelve parents of 12 children, aged 6–0 years who received high‐intensity speech intervention (n = 6) or low‐intensity speech intervention (n = 6), were invited to participate in this study. Seven parents (n = 3 in the high‐intensity group and n = 4 in the low‐intensity group) agreed to participate (total response rate: 7/12, 58.33%). A qualitative study design using semi‐structured interviews was applied. To investigate the retrospective acceptability of the two intervention intensities, deductive coding according to the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) was used. Outcomes & Results: With regard to the TFA construct 'affective attitude', results demonstrated that parents had positive feelings about the provided speech intervention regardless of the intensity. Parents of children who received high‐intensity speech intervention reported two specific benefits related to the high intervention intensity: (1) it improved their relationship with the speech‐language pathologist and (2) it improved their child's ability to make self‐corrections in his/her speech. Even though both high‐intensive and low‐intensity speech intervention were considered burdensome (TFA construct 'burden'), parents were less likely to drop out of high‐intensity intervention because the total intervention period was kept short. Conclusions & Implications: In conclusion, high‐intensity speech intervention seemed acceptable to parents. More positive codes were identified for some of the TFA constructs in the high‐intensity intervention group than in the low‐intensity intervention group. Considering that some parents doubted their self‐efficacy to participate in high‐intensity speech intervention, speech‐language pathologists need to counsel them so that they can adhere to the high intervention intensity. Future studies should investigate whether high‐intensity speech intervention is also acceptable to the children who receive the intervention and to the speech‐language pathologists who deliver the intervention. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Increasing attention is paid to the effectiveness of high‐intensity speech intervention in children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP±L). Different quantitative studies have shown positive speech outcomes after high‐intensity cleft speech intervention. Despite this increasing attention to high‐intensity speech intervention, it is unknown whether high‐intensity intervention is also acceptable to the intervention recipients. This study compared the retrospective acceptability of high‐intensity speech intervention (10 1‐hour speech therapy sessions divided over 2 weeks) with the retrospective acceptability of low‐intensity speech intervention (10 1‐hour speech therapy sessions divided over 10 weeks) in children with a CP±L from the parents' point of view. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: More positive codes were identified for some of the TFA constructs in the high‐intensity intervention group than in the low‐intensity intervention group. Nevertheless, some parents doubted their self‐efficacy to participate in high‐intensity speech intervention. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The findings of this study forces us to reconsider the traditional cleft speech intervention delivery models which usually consist of low‐intensity intervention. Speech‐language pathologists need to counsel parents and so that they can adhere to the high intervention intensity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: One of the most significant developmental accomplishments is the emergence of language in early childhood. Whilst this process is effortless for most children, others can face significant hurdles. Identifying, in the early years, which children will go on to have developmental language disorder is, however, fraught with several well‐documented challenges. In the preceding paper we described and linked new research evidence about factors that influence language development in the early years, noting that exposure to some may be time sensitive and that these influences cluster together and can accumulate over time. We demonstrated that risk profiles were associated with and characterised low language trajectories, and we considered how this information could be integrated into a concept that moves beyond screening at single time points in the early years. We argue that this evidence might be used to build an improved early years framework for language thereby creating a more equitable surveillance system that does not leave children living in less advantageous circumstances behind. Underpinning this thinking was a bioecological framework that incorporates the social, environmental and family factors in the child's ecosystem known to influence language development in the early years. Aims: To develop a proposal for the design and implementation of an early language public health framework based on current best evidence Methods: We synthesised the findings from the companion paper (Reilly & McKean 2023) regarding early language trajectories, inequalities and clustering of risks with key public health concepts, relevant intervention evidence and implementation theories to develop a new framework for language surveillance and preventative interventions in the early years. Main Contribution: An evidence informed early language public health framework is presented. Describing in turn (1) essential components; (2) relevant interventions; (3) essential qualities for implementation ((i) probabilistic, (ii) proportionate, (iii) developmental and sustained and (iv) codesigned); (4) system‐level structures and (5) processes required to adopt and embed an early language public health framework in an existing Local Government Area's child health surveillance and early prevention‐intervention systems. Conclusions: Children's language development influences their life chances across the life course and language difficulties are unfairly distributed across society. Current evidence points to the need for whole systems approaches to early child language and enables a blueprint for such a framework to be described. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Early child language development sets the stage for a child's life chances and language difficulties can have profound long‐term consequences. Such difficulties are unfairly distributed across society and the reach of preventative services is not universal or equitable. What this study adds: Several effective primary and secondary preventative interventions exist but their successful implementation is not straightforward. An early language public health framework of surveillance and intervention is described to provide equitable and effective early interventions to children from 0–4 years. We detail the essential components, interventions and qualities of that framework and describe system‐level structures and processes required to adopt and embed an early language public health framework in a given locality. What are the clinical implications of this work?: A whole systems approach to early child language is required and should be co‐designed through local collaboration with family, community and children's services stakeholders. A public health speech and language therapist role could catalyse the implementation of such approaches and support continuous improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early childhood teachers (ECTs) play a significant role in equipping children with oral language and emergent literacy skills ahead of school entry. They are well positioned to play a vital role in ensuring preschool children receive a high‐quality preschool curriculum to prepare them for later literacy learning. Aims: The purpose of this study was to explore early career ECTs' views and confidence regarding their role in providing preschoolers with oral language and emergent literacy support and to examine their perceptions of their preservice preparation. Methods & Procedures: Nine Australian early career ECTs were recruited via purposive sampling for an in‐depth, semi‐structured interview. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Outcomes & Results: Participants attached strong significance to their role in facilitating children's oral language growth and emergent literacy skills and reported a range of practices to support children's learning. However, they rarely referred to using established language facilitation strategies or using dialogic book reading prompts. Further, emergent literacy concepts such as phonological awareness and print awareness were not routinely described as features of participants' classroom activities. Participants did not consistently make a clear conceptual distinction between the constructs of oral language and emergent literacy and often used these terms interchangeably. Notably, participants indicated that they did not feel confident in their ability to identify preschool children who were not meeting developmental language milestones and reported that they felt poorly equipped to do so by their preservice training. Conclusions & Implications: ECTs' strong willingness to support preschool children's oral language and emergent literacy skills may be hindered by gaps in their knowledge; these may contribute to important and missed opportunities for identifying and supporting preschoolers' oral language and emergent literacy growth. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject?: High‐quality learning experiences in preschool are important for maximising preschoolers' oral language and emergent literacy growth. Early childhood teachers can play an important role in facilitating this development and preparing children for later literacy learning. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: The study findings provide insight into ECTs' perceptions of their role and support in developing children's oral language and emergent literacy skills. The results indicated ECTs did not feel confident with their knowledge of children's language milestones or identifying children with language difficulties. Participants reported that their preservice training left them underprepared in the area of oral language. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: ECTs demonstrated a strong willingness to support preschoolers' oral language and emergent literacy skills. However, their self‐reported knowledge gaps and low confidence may have implications for the early detection of children who are not reaching language developmental milestones in a timely way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech and language therapists (SLTs) use videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) results to manage dysphagia. Yet, in some services only doctors can directly request a VFSS, potentially creating workflow inefficiencies and delaying patient access to VFSS. An alternative model, where SLTs directly refer patients for VFSS, is used in many services in the UK and Australia. However, processes for implementing and sustaining this model have not been reported. Aims: To evaluate the implementation of an SLT‐led inpatient VFSS referring model using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to ascertain implementation barriers, facilitators and critical sustainability factors. Methods & Procedures: This implementation evaluation examined stakeholder perceptions of implementing the SLT‐led VFSS referring model via interviews of (1) SLTs who treat and refer inpatients for VFSS; (2) doctors who manage and refer inpatients for VFSS; (3) radiologists; and (4) trained VFSS referring SLTs. The CFIR was used to prospectively guide implementation planning, evaluation and outcome reporting, regarding barriers, facilitators and sustainability factors. Outcomes & Results: Implementation facilitators were (1) the advantage of SLT‐led VFSS referring over the standard model (doctors referring), in promoting high‐quality VFSS referrals; (2) compatibility of the model with the SLT skill set; (3) supportive communication networks between staff groups; and (4) engaging stakeholders throughout implementation. Adequate availability of trained VFSS referring SLTs was both a barrier and a facilitator of implementation. It was also a critical sustainability factor, along with ongoing staff education and outcome monitoring. Conclusions & Implications: The CFIR supported systematic evaluation of implementation facilitators and barriers, and adjustment of factors critical for implementing and sustaining the new model. Findings may assist other organizations to establish the SLT‐led VFSS referring model. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Models where SLTs directly refer patients for VFSS have been described in the literature, with evidence of appropriate referrals and adherence to radiation safety standards. However, the process for establishing and sustaining this referring model has not been published. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study describes the process and outcomes of implementing an SLT‐led VFSS referring model, using the CFIR. A key advantage of the new model that facilitated implementation was the improved quality of VFSS referrals compared with the standard referring model. Important facilitating factors in the environment were the compatibility of the model with SLTs' skillset and supportive communication network between doctors and SLTs. Initially, an implementation barrier was the inadequate availability of trained SLT referrers. Using proactive implementation strategies, more referrers were trained (which was a facilitating factor for implementing and sustaining the model). What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This study highlights that successful implementation requires more than just an effective model. Features of the environment require consideration to minimize barriers and optimize facilitating factors, supported by proactive implementation strategies. Planning and evaluating implementation processes and outcomes using a standardized implementation framework such as CFIR aided understanding of barriers and facilitators for introducing the SLT‐led VFSS referring model. This process may assist other services to implement the model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence‐based practice involves the synthesis of multiple forms of evidence to inform clinical decision‐making and treatment evaluation. Practice‐ and patient‐based evidence are two forms of evidence that are under‐represented in the stuttering literature. The collection of such knowledge is essential to support the design and delivery of effective stuttering interventions for adults. Aims: To build stakeholder consensus on the core components of intervention for adults who stutter, and to establish a guiding framework for the design and development of evidence‐based interventions for adults who stutter. Methods & Procedures: Adults who stutter and speech and language therapists (SLTs) with experience in providing stuttering intervention participated in the three‐round e‐Delphi Survey focused on: (1) identifying key stuttering intervention components, including principles, practices, and structural and contextual elements; and (2) obtaining group consensus on stuttering intervention components. Statements were categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model adapted to the study of stuttering. Outcomes & Results: A total of 48 individuals agreed to participate: 48/48 (100%) completed the Round 1 questionnaire, 40/48 (83%) responded to Round 2 and 36/40 (90%) participated in Round 3. Following content analysis of Round 1, 101 statements were developed, and consensus was achieved on 89 statements perceived as representing the core components of stuttering intervention for adults. Categorization of these statements reflected the key stuttering intervention components relating to personal reactions to stuttering, limitations in life participation and environmental factors. Conclusions & Implications: Consensus on the core components of stuttering intervention was reached through engagement with key stakeholders. The evidence‐based framework presented highlights the range of key intervention components a clinician should consider when designing interventions for adults who stutter. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Evidence‐based practice endorses the synthesis of multiple knowledge forms including research, practice and patient evidence to support clinical decision‐making and treatment evaluation. The stuttering literature is characterized by an over‐representation of efficacy evidence, with significantly less practice and patient evidence to guide clinical practice. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study adds valuable practice‐ and patient‐based evidence for effective stuttering intervention components for adults who stutter. These relate to personal reactions to stuttering, limitations in life participation and environmental factors. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This research presents a stakeholder‐informed framework for stuttering intervention to guide SLTs working with adults who stutter in designing evidence‐based interventions. The framework supports the adoption of a person‐centred approach to intervention to ensure each client's unique needs, preferences, values and desired outcomes are explored and integrated into therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Supporting psychosocial well‐being in aphasia is necessarily person‐centred, interdisciplinary and coordinated. Shortcomings in such support are described in Ireland and elsewhere. Speech and language therapists (SLTs) are integral; and describing current practice and barriers they experience is important for enhancing service delivery. Aims: To understand how SLTs enact, and are supported to enact, aphasia psychosocial care in Ireland. Methods & Procedures: This is a cross‐sectional, online, self‐administered clinician survey targeting SLTs working minimally 1 year post‐qualification with persons with aphasia of any aetiology in Ireland. The survey questions were charted against key constructs of the implementation science framework, normalization process theory (NPT), and descriptive statistics were applied. Outcomes & Results: A total of 54 eligible datasets were included. SLTs believed psychosocial support to be part of their role, but perceived multiple barriers in enacting it. These included a lack of training, clinical supervision, management support, role recognition, and access to and joint working with mental health professionals and services. Conclusions & Implications: SLTs in Ireland face a range of individual and structural barriers, including care coordination and resourcing. There is a clear need not only for training, upskilling and mentorship, but also for wider changes around access to mental health professionals and clarity around the processes of referral, coordination and integration of aphasia care across settings. These findings comprise preliminary insights into current practices. Further research is needed as well as clarity on best‐practice pathways for different aetiologies of aphasia. Articulating current practices using NPT may have utility for developing empirically informed and principled interventions to improve service delivery. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: People with aphasia of all aetiologies are at risk of psychosocial problems. Shortcomings in access and the availability of appropriate support have been documented both internationally and in Ireland. To address this issue, an important first step is to understand how SLTs in Ireland currently enact and are supported to enact aphasia psychosocial care. What this study adds to the existing knowledge: The findings describe the potential levers and barriers to progressing aphasia psychosocial care in Ireland. A range of individual, team and structural factors were identified. These were locally contextualized but similar issues are reported in other countries. Linking attitudes with NPT constructs provides a first step for further principled implementation projects. What are the practical and clinical implications of this study?: Addressing psychosocial problems is perceived as a legitimate part of the speech and language therapy role. SLTs in Ireland enact a range of therapeutic approaches but may need opportunities for formal training and supervision, and for better coordination and integration with other mental health services and disciplines. Understanding differences in care pathways across the range of aphasia aetiologies is additionally important given the emphasis on post‐stroke aphasia in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As health systems face increasing demands, non‐medical prescribing is a workforce redesign strategy adopted within some services. Despite successful implementation in other professional groups, non‐medical prescribing within speech pathology (SP) has not yet been described. Aims: To provide a descriptive account of the development and planned implementation of two SP prescribing models. Methods & Procedures: The evolution of two SP‐led prescribing models, including relevant training and credentialing, for use of (1) nystatin oral drops (100,000 units/mL); and (2) lidocaine (lignocaine) and phenylephrine nasal spray (5 mg/500 μg/spray), in the outpatient setting is detailed. Challenges to implementation are outlined. Main Contribution: The development of relevant governance structures, a research evidenced‐based project evaluation framework, and an overview of training pathways and credentialing was successfully completed. However, implementation of the models was unable to be achieved. A thorough review of the requirements and a discussion of contextual considerations that had a negative influence on the implementation of SP‐led prescribing within this specific service context is provided. Conclusions & Implications: The successful implementation of SP‐led prescribing is complex and highly context dependent. This work offers a discussion and review of the complexities of introducing a non‐medical prescribing model in an outpatient hospital setting. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Allied Health prescribing is an emerging practice area aiming to reduce current pressures on health services. SP‐led prescribing has not been thoroughly investigated in the Australian context. What this study adds to existing knowledge: This study describes the development of a SP‐led prescribing process in the outpatient setting, and a thorough review and discussion of the drivers and barriers to the model's implementation. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The successful implementation of SP‐led prescribing was identified to be complex from a legislative and operational perspective, as well as being highly context dependent. This study further highlights the importance of a thorough context evaluation and workflow mapping prior to full‐scale implementation of SP prescribing trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: : Group singing for people with Parkinson's disease (PD) is an established intervention not only to improve voice and speech difficulties but also for emotional and social benefit. Less is known about the experiences of group singing on the couple—the person with PD and their spouse or partner together—and studies have not specifically tracked impact through time or in combination with songwriting. Aims: : To understand the impact of group singing/songwriting on couples (participants with PD and their spouses) to unpack whether this broader view might help explain why such interventions are reported as beneficial. Using a trajectory approach, a form of longitudinal research and focused ethnography, the research sought a deeper appreciation of participation through time for the couple in a singing/songwriting group. Methods & Procedures: : Four couples attending a singing/songwriting programme were observed for 10 weeks, and interviewed formally and informally weekly. Data were analysed thematically across‐case through framework analysis but also within‐case to explore the couples' experiences and narratives over time. Outcomes & Results: : The theme of 'improved relationships' between the couples was new and extended previous studies' findings of positivity, physical benefit, sense of self and social opportunity. The stories of each couple highlighted the importance of musical reminiscence and emotional respite, and demonstrated changes with time through the singing and songwriting group. Conclusions & Implications: : The benefits of offering singing/songwriting groups may be felt not only by participants with PD but also by their spouses/partners even if they choose not to attend themselves. Such benefits may include improved relationships related to the shared joy of music, musical reminiscence and emotional respite. The addition of songwriting encourages creativity and agency. A longitudinal trajectory approach is one way to appreciate how these benefits may unfold over time for participants. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Group singing for people with PD has been shown to have physical, emotional and social benefits as measured on mainly pre‐post‐assessments of vocal, speech, respiratory function and quality of life questionnaires. What this study adds to the existing knowledge: This study adds three new aspects: studying the benefits for the couple (both people with PD and their spouse/partner); taking an in‐depth focused ethnographic approach over time to collect couples' narratives and experiences; and exploring the potential for adding songwriting to the intervention. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: A qualitative trajectory approach may help clinicians understand why such interventions are experienced as beneficial. Clinicians running singing groups for people with PD should offer attendance to spouses/partners because of the potential for such groups to improve relationships and build new points of connection for the couple, as well as provide peer support for spouses. Songwriting is a useful addition for creativity, cognitive flexibility and self‐expression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]