Search

Background: The involvement of speech and language therapists (SLTs) within paediatric palliative care (PPC) settings has been recognized within the extant literature. However, there is little understanding of SLT's specific roles and practices when working with this vulnerable cohort of children and their families. As part of a larger body of work to develop consensus‐based recommendations for SLTs working in PPC, it is important to investigate demographic and caseload characteristics. Aims: This exploratory study aimed to gather previously undocumented international demographic data pertaining to SLT service provision, caseload and training in PPC. Additionally, it sought to ascertain the current treatment and assessment approaches of SLTs, and if variations exist in beliefs and practices. Methods & Procedures: An anonymous cross‐sectional survey was designed and reported according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E‐Surveys (CHERRIES). The online survey consisted of 40 items spanning four domains: (1) demographic information, (2) caseload information, (3) service provision and (4) training and education. SLTs from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, Ireland and the United States were recruited using a purposive snowball sampling approach. Descriptive analysis of closed‐ended survey responses and content analysis of open‐ended responses are presented. Outcomes & Results: A total of 52 respondents completed the survey. SLTs worked in a variety of PPC settings, with patients of varying age and disease groups. Over 50% of participants reported working in PPC for ≤ 4 years. Genetic disorders (34%), oncology (27%) and neurological conditions (21%) made up a significant portion of respondents' caseloads. Reported treatments and assessment approaches used by SLTs are not unique to a PPC population. Barriers and enablers for practice were identified. A portion of participants did not feel trained and prepared to assess (19.2%) or treat (15.4%) PPC clients. Conclusions & Implications: This study confirms that SLTs internationally have a role in the management of communication and swallowing impairments in a PPC context. However, whether current training and resources adequately support SLTs in this role remains questionable. This paper helps to provide SLTs, administrators, professional associations and tertiary institutions with foundational data to help inform workforce planning, advocacy efforts and training priorities. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectThe published multidisciplinary literature has identified that SLTs have a role in PPC. However, there has been no targeted research investigating the professional characteristics of clinicians in this context, nor any detailed information regarding associated clinician beliefs or management approaches.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study is a snapshot of attributes, practice patterns and beliefs of SLTs who work with a PPC population. It highlights SLT perspectives of education and training, as well as meta‐perceptions of themselves within the multidisciplinary team.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Data presented in this paper will help to enable SLTs, organizations and associations to augment service provision and determine future professional development priorities within the field of PPC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Academic programmes in speech–language pathology are increasingly providing telehealth/telepractice clinical education to students. Despite this growth, there is little information describing effective ways to teach it. Aims: The current exploratory study analyzed the perceptions of speech–language pathology/therapy (SLP/SLT) faculty, student and SLP/SLT clinicians to ascertain effective pedagogical approaches for telepractice service delivery, rank the relative importance of telepractice skills and knowledge competencies, and define any pedagogical challenges to teaching them. Methods & Procedures: Qualitative data were collected from two sources: three open‐ended questions within an online survey (SLP/SLT faculty n = 31, graduate students n = 16, telehealth (‘telepractice’) clinicians n = 16); and follow‐up telephone interviews (n = 22). Data were analyzed with a grounded theory approach followed by a summative rank‐order analysis of themes. Outcomes & Results: All three groups agreed the most effective telepractice instructional approach was telepractice demonstrations (such as students role playing or watching a supervisor). Professional development approaches such as workshops or training manuals were less effective and didactic approaches such as lecture‐only were ineffective. Skills and knowledge competencies students needed before entering the workforce were, in order of implied importance: telepractice clinical skills, telepractice technology skills, legal knowledge pertinent to telepractice and knowledge of telepractice literature. The most important telepractice clinical skills students needed to acquire were appropriate selection of telepractice materials and engaging the client over the internet. Many participants said teaching and learning telepractice was more challenging than in‐person service delivery because of the difficulties in selecting appropriate telepractice clinical materials, managing technology problems and engaging with clients over the internet. Conclusions & Implications: Despite substantial limitations to this investigation, findings imply that telepractice instruction, like other methods of SLP/SLT clinical education, may be most effective when students engage in critical thinking and problem‐solving issues through intense practice. Because the skills and competencies associated with telepractice appear to vary in their perceived value, academic programmes may wish to consider prioritizing how they are taught, giving students additional instruction in the selection of telepractice clinical materials and development of online interpersonal communication skills. For some clinical educators, the challenges associated with telepractice may necessitate additional educator training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]