Search

Background: Speech sound disorders (SSDs) are the most common form of communication disorders in children. SSD have an impact on children's abilities to make themselves understood to their listeners and can influence a child's social and emotional well‐being as well as their academic achievements. Therefore, it is important to identify children with an SSD early, in order to provide appropriate intervention. A wealth of information on best practice in the assessment of children with SSD is available in countries where the speech and language therapy profession is well established. In Sri Lanka, there is a paucity of research evidence supporting assessment practices that are culturally and linguistically appropriate in SSDs. Therefore, clinicians rely on informal assessment methods. There is a need to understand more about how clinicians in Sri Lanka assess this caseload in order to get general agreement regarding comprehensive and consistent procedures for assessment of paediatric SSD in Sri Lanka. This would support speech and language therapists' (SLTs') clinical decision‐making in relation to choice of appropriate goals and intervention for this caseload. Aim: To develop and gain consensus on an assessment protocol for Sri Lankan children with SSD that is culturally appropriate and based on existing research. Method: A modified Delphi method was utilised to gather data from clinicians currently working in Sri Lanka. The research involved three rounds of data collection, exploring current assessment practices in Sri Lanka, ranking these in order of priority and establishing consensus on a proposed assessment protocol. The proposed assessment protocol was based on the results of the first and second rounds as well as previously published best practice guidelines. Outcome and Results: The proposed assessment protocol achieved consensus in relation to content, format and cultural appropriateness. SLTs affirmed the usefulness of the protocol within the Sri Lankan context. Further research is required to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of this protocol in practice. Conclusions & Implications: The assessment protocol supports practicing SLTs with a general guide to assessing children with suspected SSDs in Sri Lanka. The application of this protocol built upon consensus enables clinicians to improve their individual practice patterns based on best practice recommendations in the literature and the evidence on culturally and linguistically appropriate practices. This study has identified the need for further research in this area, including the development of culturally and linguistically specific assessment tools that would complement the use of this protocol. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: The assessment of children with speech sound disorders (SSDs) requires a comprehensive and holistic approach due to their heterogeneous nature. Although there is evidence to support the assessment of paediatric SSDs in many countries where the profession of speech and language therapy is established, there is limited evidence to support the assessment of children with SSDs in Sri Lanka. What this study adds: This study provides information about current assessment practices in Sri Lanka and consensus on a proposed culturally appropriate protocol for the assessment of children with SSDs in this country. What are the clinical implications of this work?: The proposed assessment protocol provides speech and language therapists in Sri Lanka with a guide for assessment of paediatric SSDs to support more consistent practice in this area. Future evaluation of this preliminary protocol is required; however, the methodology used in this research could be applied to the development of assessment protocols for other range of practice areas in this country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Simulation‐based learning can be used in university programmes to provide speech–language pathology students with essential clinical experiences. However, limited research has explored the use of simulation to support students' development of skills in clinical practice with people who stutter. Aims: (1) To evaluate students' clinical skills in managing stuttering within a simulation‐based learning programme; (2) to develop an assessment tool, the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale for Stuttering (SPIRS‐Stuttering); and (3) to conduct a preliminary investigation of its validity in measuring students' performance. Methods & Procedures: Speech–language pathology students (n = 114) participated in a simulation‐based stuttering programme in addition to academic coursework in fluency disorders. Students' clinical skills were assessed over two simulation sessions using the SPIRS‐Stuttering tool, adapted from an earlier iteration of the SPIRS tool. Content validity, intra‐rater reliability and internal consistency of the SPIRS‐Stuttering tool were also explored. Outcomes & Results: Students demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in stuttering clinical skills between sessions 1 and 4 of the simulation‐based stuttering programme. Good content validity was achieved for the SPIRS‐Stuttering tool with a low level of intra‐rater reliability and variable internal consistency. Conclusions & Implications: This study identified that students' clinical skills in stuttering improved during participation in a simulation‐based programme undertaken in conjunction with an academic course on fluency disorders. The results of this study support the inclusion of this learning modality in university programme curricula. Whilst the SPIRS‐Stuttering tool enabled assessment of speech–language pathology students' clinical skills in stuttering management, further exploration of reliability is required. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Within speech–language pathology, simulation‐based learning is a teaching approach used in university clinical programme curricula. Simulation‐based learning is used as an opportunity for students to gain specific clinical skills, particularly if clinical experiences are readily not available. Research in speech–language pathology has revealed that students value simulation because it provides a safe learning environment. What this study adds to existing knowledge: There are fewer opportunities for students to gain clinical experience in the management of stuttering in adults. This study explored students' clinical skill development within a stuttering simulation‐based learning programme. Additionally, it detailed the development and preliminary investigation of validity of the SPIRS‐Stuttering, an assessment tool used in a simulation‐based learning environment. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Students' clinical skills in the assessment and management of stuttering in adults, as measured by the SPIRS‐Stuttering, improved during participation in the stuttering simulation‐based learning programme. Further investigation of validity of the SPIRS‐Stuttering tool is required to confidently measure students' performance. The stuttering simulation‐based learning programme can be used to provide students with an opportunity to develop their clinical skills in stuttering, a practice area in speech–language pathology that is not always available to students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research suggests that some speech–language pathologists are uncomfortable treating people who stutter. Accessing quality clinical education experiences in stuttering is difficult given the ongoing rise in students enrolled in speech–language pathology programmes and the limited number of stuttering‐specific placements available. Simulation‐based learning is a viable option for providing speech–language pathology students with practical experience in a safe learning environment. Whilst research has found that simulation‐based learning experiences in stuttering assist in the development of students' clinical skills, students' perceptions of participating in stuttering simulation‐based learning are yet to be explored. Aims: To investigate speech–language pathology students' comfort, anxiety, knowledge and confidence in the management of stuttering at the commencement of an academic stuttering course and before and following participation in a stuttering simulation‐based learning programme. Methods & Procedures: This study used a cross‐sectional survey design. Participants were 105 undergraduate and graduate entry masters speech–language pathology students enrolled at an Australian university. Students engaged in a stuttering simulation‐based learning programme embedded within an existing academic course on the management of stuttering. A purposefully developed survey was administered at three time points: pre‐course (T1), pre‐simulation (T2) and post‐simulation (T3) in order to explore students' comfort and anxiety levels, and perceptions of their knowledge and confidence in stuttering management. Descriptive statistics were used to report the medians and range of students' responses. Changes across all time points and between each of the time points were determined using the Friedman test and the Wilcoxon signed rank test, respectively. Outcomes & Results: Statistically significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed on all matched survey items (n = 96) across all time points. Between each time point, a significant difference in students' perceived knowledge levels was found with small to large effect sizes. However, there was no difference in students' perceived comfort and anxiety levels between the time points of pre‐course and pre‐simulation. Open‐ended responses on the post‐simulation survey revealed that students valued learning about stuttering within a simulation‐based learning environment. Conclusions & Implications: Simulation‐based learning experience in stuttering management was valued by students. When accompanied by theoretical content, participation in a stuttering simulation‐based learning programme supported students to feel more comfortable and less anxious about working with people who stutter. This finding has implications for the development of clinical skills in the assessment and treatment of adults who stutter. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Simulation is a teaching approach used within speech–language pathology to support the development of students' clinical skills. Simulation provides a safe learning environment for students, an opportunity for repeated practice and is valued by students. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study explored students' perceptions of their comfort, anxiety, knowledge and confidence in working with people who stutter before and following participation in a simulation‐based learning programme. It describes a stuttering simulation‐based learning programme that can be embedded into speech–language pathology programme curricula. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The stuttering simulation‐based learning programme detailed in this study can be applied and embedded in speech–language pathology curricula. It can be used to support the development of students' confidence in the assessment and management of stuttering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Methods Results Conclusion WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS What is already known on this subject What this paper adds to existing knowledge What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Collaborative approaches in speech‐language pathology (SLP) aim to integrate the experience of clients and people important to them by including these stakeholders actively in decision making. This inclusion can lead to more effective, engaging, and safer SLP practice. A variety of collaborative approaches have evolved in response to sociocultural contexts, and as a result, there are many different approaches currently in use such as co‐design, co‐production, and co‐creation. However, despite widening acceptance and utilisation of collaborative approaches, the use and evidence for these in SLP literature have not been considered collectively. The current study aims to explore how collaborative approaches, used to develop products or services in SLP, are reported in literature.Using narrative review methodology, a systematic search of three databases and hand searching were conducted to explore how collaborative approaches, used to develop products or services, are reported in SLP. Search terms reflected the breadth of collaborative approaches and the diverse nature of SLP across clinical practice. Following screening of initial data, 59 articles were identified for data extraction and narrative synthesis. An internationally recognised reporting checklist for stakeholder involvement called the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public, Version 2 (GRIPP2), informed the reviewing process in addition to qualitative description.Collaborative approaches across SLP practice were found to be diverse as were the terminology and tools used for collaboration. Two‐thirds of the studies were published after 2020. The timing and involvement of stakeholders in collaborative approaches varied greatly; however, most stakeholder involvement was found in the conducting of research activities, compared to other areas such as planning, analysis, and reporting. The GRIPP2 review indicated strengths and opportunities in reporting of stakeholder involvement. When stakeholder involvement was rigorously reported it could include reflection on how stakeholders contributed within their communication abilities and how this contribution benefited the study.Collaborative approaches reported in SLP focused on valuing and respecting people with living experience of communication and swallowing difficulties. This narrative review contributes to the resources available to support decision‐making and working together with stakeholders, encouraging SLPs to reflect, consider the context and respond. Future research could continue to strengthen consistency in terminology for collaborative approaches, use frameworks to plan and report stakeholder involvement and carefully consider involvement across the research continuum. There is an expectation that health services include stakeholders in development and evaluation of services. Collaborative approaches in speech‐language pathology (SLP) aim to integrate the lived experience of people with communication and swallowing difficulties and those important to them. These approaches, including but not limited to, co‐design, co‐production and participatory action research, have shared philosophies of being community‐driven, strengths based and inclusive (Loeffler & Bovaird, 2021). This study contributes information about current SLP practice when collaborative approaches have been employed to develop a product or service. The study maps diverse collaborative approaches and their frequency in the literature, as well as the various stakeholders involved, using the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public, Version 2 (GRIPP2) checklists to guide the review of reporting stakeholder involvement. This synthesis of literature supports researchers and clinicians in making intentional decisions in implementation and reporting of collaborative approaches. This decision‐making can strengthen the implementation of collaborative approaches, which has implications for person‐centred care in SLP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Information is available about what predicts Lidcombe Program treatment time, but nothing is known about what predicts treatment prognosis. Aims: To investigate the predictors of treatment dropout and treatment outcome for children who were treated for early stuttering with the Lidcombe Program (N = 277). Methods & Procedures: A total of 32 variables were used as predictors in regression analyses of short‐ and medium‐term Lidcombe Program outcome, and of treatment dropout. Outcomes & Results: Regression analyses associated children who have better language skills and easy temperament with better treatment outcome, although only a small portion of the variance of treatment outcome was accounted for by these variables. There was an association between treatment dropout and parental scores on a personality screening tool relating to their impulsivity. Conclusions & Implications: Variables identified as predictors of Lidcombe Program treatment outcome were statistically significant, but not clinically significant. They did not account for a clinically substantive portion of treatment outcomes. Findings about parental impulsivity and their relationship with intervention drop‐out require replication with prospective methods and comprehensive assessment of parent psychological status. This is particularly important because parents are involved in conducting all early interventions. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectInformation is available about what predicts Lidcombe Program treatment time, but nothing is known about what predicts Lidcombe Program treatment outcome.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThere are predictors of Lidcombe Program treatment outcome that are statistically significant, but none are clinically significant.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Clinicians can tell parents that nothing has been found that can assist with making prognostic indications about treatment outcome for their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Simulation‐based learning provides students with a safe learning environment, guaranteed exposure to specific clinical scenarios and patients, time for reflection and repetition of tasks, and an opportunity to receive feedback from multiple sources. Research including studies specific to allied health training programmes have demonstrated that simulation‐based learning also helps increase learners' confidence and reduces anxiety related to clinical environments, activities and skills. Such evidence, together with increasing challenges in provision of workplace clinical education, has supported an expansion of integrating simulation‐based learning into university curricula. Aims: To provide detailed information about the processes and considerations involved in the development of a simulation‐based learning programme for speech–language pathology. Methods & Procedures: Through reflection on the development process of a 5‐day simulation‐based learning programme, and in light of existing research in simulation, this paper outlines the important steps and considerations required for the development of a simulation‐based learning programme to support student competency development in adult speech pathology range of practice areas. Main Contribution: A proposed framework for the development of future simulation‐based learning programmes in speech–language pathology. Conclusions & Implications: The framework can be applied to simulation‐based learning for university programmes and/or workplace training in speech–language pathology and across several other health disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Clinical placements are crucial to the development of skills and competencies in speech–language pathology (SLP) education and, more generally, a requirement of all health professional training programmes. Literature from medical education provides a context for understanding how the environment can be vital to all students’ learning. Given the increasing costs of education and demands on health services, students who struggle or fail on clinical placement place an additional burden on educators. Therefore, if more is known or understood about these students and their experience in relation to the clinical learning environment, appropriate strategies and support can be provided to reduce the burden. However, this literature does not specifically explore marginal or failing students and their experience. Aims: To review existing research that has explored failing and struggling health professional students undertaking clinical placements and, in particular, SLP students. Methods & Procedures: A critical narrative review was undertaken. Three electronic databases, ProQuest, CINAHL and OVID (Medline 1948–), were searched for papers exploring marginal and failing students in clinical placement contexts across all health professions, published between 1988 and 2017. Data were extracted and examined to determine the breadth of the existing research, and publications were critically appraised and major research themes identified. Main Contribution: Sixty‐nine papers were included in the review. The majority came from medicine and nursing in the United States and United Kingdom, with other allied health disciplines less well represented. The review identified key themes with the majority of papers focused on identification of at risk students and support and remediation. The review also highlighted the absence of literature relating to the student voice and in the allied health professions. Conclusions & Implications: This review highlighted the limited research related to failing/struggling student learning in clinical contexts, and only a handful of papers have specifically addressed marginal or failing students in allied health professions. The complexity of interrelated factors in this field has been highlighted in this review. Further research needs to include the student's voice to develop greater understanding and insights of struggle and failure in clinical contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]