Search

Objective: The purpose of this study was to obtain information about academic and clinical training of speech-language pathology students in cleft palate (CP)., Methods: Representatives of 232 accredited graduate programs in speech-language pathology were invited via e-mail to complete a web-based 32-item questionnaire. Questions focused on the type and nature of courses offered related to CP, availability of clinical practica, and number of hours of clinical experience by students. An item-by-item analysis was conducted and descriptive statistics obtained., Results: A total of 127 (54.7%) of the programs responded. Sixty-seven percent offered coursework exclusively devoted to CP, and for 53% of these it was a required course. For the programs that did not offer an exclusive course on CP, 35% indicated that CP was covered in other courses such as articulation, voice, or anatomy and physiology. Fifty-four percent of the programs offered clinical practica in CP. For these, a median of five students of a median graduate speech-language pathology class of 43 were enrolled in practica involving CP (range = 0-21), and students spent a median of 2 hours in practica involving CP (range = 0-100)., Conclusions: Cleft palate is a complex disorder to which many students have limited exposure and for which more graduate training is unlikely since the 1993 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) certification changes. As a result, there is a need to look towards alternative methods to enhance the educational and clinical experiences of students and practitioners in cleft palate.

A questionnaire on nasopharyngoscopy was completed by 93 speech-language pathologists randomly selected from the Directory of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. Although the majority rated nasopharyngoscopy as important in the assessment of velopharyngeal function, and believed that it should be performed by speech-language pathologists, the majority do not perform nasopharyngoscopic examinations. Moreover, 40% had no academic preparation and 20% had no clinical experience in nasopharyngoscopy. Implications of these findings concerning exposure to nasopharyngoscopy in speech-language pathology graduate training programs and in continuing education programs for practicing speech-language pathologists are discussed.

A 16-item questionnaire designed to survey opinions on the management of velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) was distributed to all members (N = 296) of the American Cleft Palate Association who were speech-language pathologists. Questionnaires were completed by 173 respondents (58.4 percent). There were differences of opinion among speech-language pathologists on various management issues related to VPI, including the value of instrumental assessment of VPI, the importance of oral examination of velopharyngeal function, and the effectiveness of speech therapy in the treatment of VPI. The implications of these findings for clinical training in VPI are discussed.