Search

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]

Background: There are few economic evaluations of speech and language interventions. Such work requires underpinning by an accurate estimate of the costs of the intervention. This study seeks to address some of the complexities of this task by applying existing approaches of cost estimation to interventions described in published effectiveness studies. Aims: The study has two aims: to identify a method of estimating unit costs based on the principle of long-run marginal opportunity costs; and to illustrate the challenges in estimating unit costs for speech and language interventions. Method & Procedures: Descriptions of interventions were extracted from eight papers and combined with information on the unit cost of speech and language therapists to identify information requirements for a full-cost estimation of an intervention. Outcomes & Results: Four challenges were found relating to the level of detail about the therapists, the participants, the scope of activities and parents. Different assumptions made about any of these elements will have a marked effect on the cost of the intervention. Conclusions & Implications: Nationally applicable unit cost data for speech and language therapists can be used as a reference point, but sufficient descriptive data about delivery and receipt of the intervention are key to accuracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with acquired progressive dysarthria typically experience increased problems with intelligibility in everyday conversation as their disease progresses. Such problems are likely to impact on both the person with dysarthria and those with whom they interact. If this is the case then we may ask questions not just about the nature of these problems but how it is that such problems are dealt with by participants when they occur. Aims: To investigate ways through which problems resulting from dysarthria in everyday conversation are resolved by participants. Further, to examine some of the features of repair resolution, particularly where understanding of self-repair attempts themselves prove difficult. Methods & Procedures: Video data of natural conversation from two dyads were selected for this paper. One dyad features a 58 year-old man with multiple sclerosis and moderate intelligibility problems, the other a 79 year-old woman with motor neurone disease with mild to moderate intelligibility problems. Both elected to be recorded in conversation with their spouses. The dyads were video-recorded at home with no researcher present. Using the methods of Conversation Analysis (CA) a collection of sequences was identified and transcribed. The sequences were analysed with reference to how the participants resolve problems in the understanding of dysarthric speech. Outcomes & Results: It is shown how some problems resulting from dysarthria in conversation can be resolved relatively quickly, particularly where a specific element of a prior turn is highlighted by the recipient as problematic. In other instances, the recipient's understanding problem may be more global. These result in longer repair sequences in which problematic elements are addressed individually. Such a resolution method is ultimately successful but may also be characterised by additional understanding problems. These findings draw attention to an important distinction between intelligibility and understandability. Conclusions & Implications: It is concluded that problems resulting from dysarthria in conversation can require extensive repair work involving both parties. This has implications for the assessment of dysarthria in everyday conversation and also the promotion of intervention strategies that encompass the activities of both participants when dealing with dysarthria in interaction. These findings may be usefully employed in informing both direct clinical work and through training those who work with this client group and their significant others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The inverse-care law suggests that fewer healthcare resources are available in deprived areas where health needs are greatest. Aims: To examine the provision of paediatric speech and language services across London boroughs and to relate provision to the level of deprivation of the boroughs. Methods & Procedures: Information on the employment of paediatric speech and language therapists was obtained from London boroughs by freedom-of-information requests. The relationship between the number of therapists and the index of multiple deprivation for the borough was examined. Outcomes & Results: Twenty-nine of 32 boroughs responded. A positive relationship between provision and need was obtained, suggesting that the inverse-care law does not apply. However, large inequalities of provision were found particularly among the more socially deprived boroughs. In some instances boroughs had five times as many therapists per child as other boroughs. Conclusions & Implications: The data reveal that large differences in speech and language therapy provision exist across boroughs. The reasons for these inequalities are unclear, but the lack of comparative information across boroughs is likely to be unhelpful in planning equitable services. The use of freedom of information in assessing health inequalities is stressed and its future availability is desirable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: NHS case note data are a potential source of practice-based evidence which could be used to investigate the effectiveness of different interventions for individuals with a range of speech, language and communication needs. Consistency in pre- and post-intervention data as well as the collection of relevant variables would need to be demonstrated as a precursor to adopting this approach in future investigations of speech and language therapy intervention. Aims: To explore whether routine clinical data collection for children with speech sound disorder (SSD) could be a potential source for examining the effectiveness of intervention(s). Methods & Procedures:We examined case notes from three UK NHS services, reviewing 174 sets of case notes and 234 blocks of therapy provided for school-age children with SSD. Main contribution: We found there was significant variation in pre- and postintervention data and variables collected by the services. The assessment data available in the case notes across all sites were insufficient to be used to compare the effectiveness of different interventions. Specific issues included lack of consistent reporting of pre- and post-intervention data, and use of a variety of both formal and informal assessment tools. Conclusions & Implications: The case notes reviewed were from three sites and may not represent wider clinical practice, nevertheless the findings suggest the sample explored indicates the need for more consistent and contemporaneous collection of data for children with SSD to facilitate the investigation of different interventions in practice. Researchers should work with the clinical community to determine a minimal dataset that includes a core outcome set and potential variables. This should be feasible to collect in clinical practice and provide a dataset for future investigations of clinically relevant research questions. This would provide an invaluable resource to the clinical academic and research communities enabling research questions to be addressed that have the potential to lead to improved outcomes and more cost-effective services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background A large number of people who experience a stroke are affected by dysarthria. This may be in isolation or in association with aphasia and/or dysphagia. Despite evidence highlighting the psychological and social impact of having post-stroke dysarthria and a number of clinical guidelines that make recommendations for appropriate management, little is known currently about UK service delivery issues relating to speech and language therapy (SLT) assessment and treatment for this group. Such evidence is necessary in order to plan, develop and research services for people with post-stroke dysarthria. Aims To gain an overview of SLT practices in the management of people with dysarthria after stroke in the UK. Methods & Procedures SLTs in the UK were asked to complete an online survey addressing referral patterns, caseload profiles, and their assessment and intervention methods for post-stroke dysarthria. In the absence of a national register of clinicians working with people with acquired dysarthria, a snowballing method was used to facilitate participant recruitment. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics. Outcomes & Results A total of 146 SLTs responded. The majority were employed by the National Health Service (NHS). Most patients were referred within 1 week post-stroke. Almost half the respondents did not regularly use formal assessments and the use of instrumentation was rare, including the use of video recording. The focus of therapy for mild, moderate and severe dysarthria did not differ significantly for clinicians. A little under half the respondents endorsed non-verbal oral exercises in rehabilitation. The survey demonstrated some appreciation of the centrality of regular intensive practice to effect change, but this was in a minority. Conclusions & Implications Through this research it became clear that basic information regarding post-stroke dysarthria incidence, prevalence and core demographics is currently unavailable. More embedded NHS SLT reporting systems would make a significant contribution to this area. A more in-depth examination is required of the natural history of dysarthria over the months and years following stroke, of SLT practices in relation to post-stroke dysarthria, with investigations to understand more fully the choices SLTs make and how this relates to available evidence to support their clinical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]