From the introduction: "There are two variants of fronto-temporal dementia: a behavioral variant (behavioral FTD, bvFTD, Neary et al. (1998)), which causes changes in behavior and personality but leaves syntax, phonology and semantics relatively intact, and a variant that causes impairments in the language processing system (Primary Progessive Aphasia, PPA (Gorno-Tempini et al., 2004). PPA can be subdivided into subtypes fluent (fluent but empty speech, comprehension of word meaning is affected / `semantic dementia') and non-fluent (agrammatism, hesitant or labored speech, word finding problems). Some identify logopenic aphasia as a FTD-variant: fluent aphasia with anomia but intact object recognition and underlying word meaning."
MULTIFILE
BackgroundSeveral conditions and diseases can result in speech problems that can have a negative impact on everyday functioning, referred to as communicative participation. Subjective problems with acquired speech problems are often assessed with the speech handicap index (SHI). To assess generic participation problems, the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation–Participation (USER-P) questionnaire is frequently used. The English questionnaire Communicative Participation Item Bank—short form (CPIB short form) is a 10-item valid, reliable instrument that assesses communicative participation. In the absence of a Dutch equivalent, translation and validation of the CPIB short form was required.AimsTo translate the CPIB short form into Dutch, and to determine its psychometric properties for the group of adults with speech problems resulting from a neurological aetiology or head and neck cancer.Methods & ProceduresTranslation of the CPIB short form was performed following the instructions of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment for Cancer (EORTC). In a cross-sectional multi-centre study, participants completed the Dutch CPIB short form together with the SHI and USER-P, and the CPIB a second time after 2 weeks. We assessed internal consistency and test–retest reliability of the CPIB. Construct validity was assessed based on correlations with SHI, USER-P and speech assessments.Outcomes & ResultsIn the validation study, 122 participants were included: 51 with dysarthria due to different neurological disorders, 48 with speech problems due to head and neck cancer treatment and 23 healthy controls. Internal consistency of the items was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.962), the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for test–retest reliability was high 0.908 (95% CI = 0.870–0.935). Construct validity was supported by a strong correlation between the Dutch CPIB short form and the SHI total score (SHI total rs = 0.887) and a moderate correlation between the Dutch CPIB-10 and the USER-P subscales (USER-P Frequency rs = 0.365; USER-P restrictions and USER-P satisfaction rs = 0.546). A moderate correlation was found between the Dutch CPIB-10 and the speech performance assessments (degree of distortedness r = −0.0557; p ≤ 0.001; degree of intelligibility r = 0.0562).Conclusions & ImplicationsThe Dutch CPIB short form provides a valid and reliable tool for clinical practice and research purposes. It allows clinicians to start using this PROM in clinical and research practice to systematically investigate the impact of the speech problems on communicative participation in a Dutch-speaking population.What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectCommunicative participation allows people to take part in life situations, but can be affected by acquired speech problems. The CPIB is a patient-reported outcome measure for the assessment of this concept. For the English language the 46-item bank and a 10-item short form is available.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis paper describes the process of translation of the CPIB short form into Dutch, and confirms its reproducibility and validity.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?With this validated Dutch version of the CPIB short form available, professionals can implement this tool in clinical and research practice to systematically evaluate communicative participation.
The adoption of tablets by young children has raised enthusiasm and concern among speech and language pathologists. This study investigated whether tablet games can be used as effectively as real play objects in vocabulary intervention for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). A randomized, controlled non-inferiority trial was conducted with 70 3-year-old children with DLD. The novel intervention group (n = 35) received 12 10-min scripted intervention sessions with symbolic play using a tablet game spread out over 8–9 weeks. The standard intervention group (n = 35) received the same amount of intervention with real objects using the same vocabulary scripts. In each session, children were exposed to 22 target words. The primary outcome was the number of new target words learned. This was measured using a picture selection task including 22 target words and 22 control words at 3 time intervals: before the intervention, immediately post-intervention, and 5 weeks later. In both intervention groups, the children learned significantly more target words than control words. No significant differences in gains between the two intervention conditions were found. This study provides evidence that vocabulary intervention for toddlers with DLD using a tablet game is equally as effective as an intervention using real objects.
LINK
