Search results

Collaboration between parents and SLTs produces optimal outcomes for children attending speech and language therapy: Gathering the evidence

Background: Collaboration between parents and speech and language therapists (SLTs) is seen as a key element in family-centred models. Collaboration can have positive impacts on parental and children’s outcomes. However, collaborative practice has not been well described and researched in speech and language therapy for children and may not be easy to achieve. It is important that we gain a deeper understanding of collaborative practice with parents, how it can be achieved and how it can impact on outcomes. This understanding could support practitioners in daily practice with regard to achieving collaborative practice with parents in different contexts. Aims: To set a research agenda on collaborative practice between parents and SLTs in order to generate evidence regarding what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. Methods & Procedures: A realist evaluation approach was used to make explicit what collaborative practice with parents entails. The steps suggested by the RAMESES II project were used to draft a preliminary programme theory about collaborative practice between parents and SLTs. This process generates explicit hypotheses which form a potential research agenda. Discussion & Conclusions: A preliminary programme theory of collaborative practice with parents was drafted using a realist approach. Potential contextual factors (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O) were presented which could be configured into causal mechanisms to help explain what works for whom in what circumstances. CMO configurations were drafted, based on the relevant literature, which serve as exemplars to illustrate how this methodology could be used. In order to debate, test and expand our hypothesized programme theory for collaborative practice with parents, further testing against a broader literature is required alongside research to explore the functionality of the configurations across contexts. This paper highlights the importance of further research on collaborative practice with parents and the potential value of realist evaluation methodology

Cluttering identified: differential diagnostics between cluttering, stuttering and speech impairment related to learning difficulties

Children with language delay referred to Dutch speech and hearing centres: caseload characteristics

Background: Early detection and remediation of language disorders are important in helping children to establish appropriate communicative and social behaviour and acquire additional information about the world through the use of language. In the Netherlands, children with (a suspicion of) language disorders are referred to speech and hearing centres for multidisciplinary assessment. Reliable data are needed on the nature of language disorders, as well as the age and source of referral, and the effects of cultural and socioeconomic profiles of the population served in order to plan speech and language therapy service provision. Aims: To provide a detailed description of caseload characteristics of children referred with a possible language disorder by generating more understanding of factors that might influence early identification. Methods & Procedures: A database of 11,450 children was analysed consisting of data on children, aged 2–7 years (70% boys, 30% girls), visiting Dutch speech and hearing centres. The factors analysed were age of referral, ratio of boys to girls, mono‐ and bilingualism, nature of the language delay, and language profile of the children. Outcomes & Results:Results revealed an age bias in the referral of children with language disorders. On average, boys were referred 5 months earlier than girls, and monolingual children were referred 3 months earlier than bilingual children. In addition, bilingual children seemed to have more complex problems at referral than monolingual children. They more often had both a disorder in both receptive and expressive language, and a language disorder with additional (developmental) problems. Conclusions & Implications: This study revealed a bias in age of referral of young children with language disorders. The results implicate the need for objective language screening instruments and the need to increase the awareness of staff in primary child healthcare of red flags in language development of girls and multilingual children aiming at earlier identification of language disorders in these children.

Collaboration between Speech and Language Therapists and Parents of Children with Developmental Language Disorders

In order to optimize collaboration between Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs) and parents of children with Developmental Language Disorders (DLD), our aim was to study what is needed for SLTs to transition from the parent-as-therapist aide model to the FCC model and optimal collaborate with parents. Chapter 2 discusses the significance of demystifying collaborative working by making explicit how collaboration works. Chapter 3 examines SLTs’ perspectives on engaging parents in parent-child interaction therapy, utilizing a secondary analysis of interview data. Chapter 4 presents a systematic review of specific strategies that therapists can employ to enhance their collaboration with parents of children with developmental disabilities. Chapter 5 explores the needs of parents in their collaborative interactions with SLTs during therapy for their children with DLD, based on semi-structured interviews. Chapter 6 reports the findings from a behavioral analysis of how SLTs currently engage with parents of children with DLD, using data from focus groups. Chapter 7 offers a general discussion on the findings of this thesis, synthesizing insights from previous chapters to propose recommendations for practice and future research.

How do children with speech sound disorders perform on language and motor skills of children compared to typically developing children?

Children with speech sound disorders (SSD) have speech disorders due to problems in articulation, phonology, execution (eg. dysarthria), planning (eg. apraxia), orofacial anomalies (eg. cleft palate) or hearing impairment (ASHA). How do children with speech sound disorders perform on language and motor (experimental) tests compared to typically developing children?

Speech and language therapists' insights into severity of speech sound disorders in children for developing the speech sound disorder severity construct

Background Children with speech sound disorders (SSD) are at higher risk of communication breakdown, but the impact of having an SSD may vary from child to child. Determining the severity of SSD helps speech-language therapists (SLTs) to recognise the extent of the problem and to identify and prioritise children who require intervention. Aims This study aimed to identify severity factors for SSD in order to develop a multifactorial Speech Sound Disorder Severity Construct (SSDSC) using SLTs’ views and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Method In an explorative five-staged qualitative study, the research question was answered: ‘How do SLTs determine the severity of SSD in children?’. A total of 91 SLTs from The Netherlands participated in data collection and analysis. The iterative process included three different qualitative research methodologies (thematic analysis [TA], constructivist grounded theory [CGT] and content analysis [CA]) to ensure validation of the results by means of method triangulation. Results SLTs considered nine themes: intelligibility, speech accuracy, persistence, the child's perception, impact, communicative participation, concomitant factors, professional point of view, and environmental factors. The themes were summarised in three main severity factors: (I) Speech accuracy, (II) The child's perception of the impact of their speech, and (III) Intelligibility in communication. Other severity factors were concomitant factors and impact. Expertise and support were identified as facilitators or barriers that may worsen or relieve the severity of SSD. Conclusions This study highlights the need for SLTs to rethink how they think about severity as a simplistic construct reflecting only speech accuracy. It is recommended that a broader holistic approach to measuring severity is adopted.