Evaluation of a mechanical hand-support for facilitated communication

Intervention Techniques Used With Autism Spectrum Disorder by Speech-Language Pathologists in the United States and Taiwan: A Descriptive Analysis of Practice in Clinical Settings

PURPOSE

This study examined intervention techniques used with children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in the United States and Taiwan working in clinic/hospital settings. The research questions addressed intervention techniques used with children with ASD, intervention techniques used with different age groups (under and above 8 years old), and training received before using the intervention techniques.

METHOD

The survey was distributed through the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association to selected SLPs across the United States. In Taiwan, the survey (Chinese version) was distributed through the Taiwan Speech-Language Pathologist Union, 2018, to certified SLPs.

RESULTS

Results revealed that SLPs in the United States and Taiwan used 4 common intervention techniques: Social Skill Training, Augmentative and Alternative Communication, Picture Exchange Communication System, and Social Stories. Taiwanese SLPs reported SLP preparation program training across these common intervention strategies. In the United States, SLPs reported training via SLP preparation programs, peer therapists, and self-taught.

CONCLUSIONS

Most SLPs reported using established or emerging evidence-based practices as defined by the National Professional Development Center (2014) and the National Standards Report (2015). Future research should address comparison of SLP preparation programs to examine the impact of preprofessional training on use of evidence-based practices to treat ASD.

Autism spectrum disorder: Consensus guidelines on assessment, treatment and research from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

An expert review of the aetiology, assessment, and treatment of autism spectrum disorder, and recommendations for diagnosis, management and service provision was coordinated by the British Association for Psychopharmacology, and evidence graded. The aetiology of autism spectrum disorder involves genetic and environmental contributions, and implicates a number of brain systems, in particular the gamma-aminobutyric acid, serotonergic and glutamatergic systems. The presentation of autism spectrum disorder varies widely and co-occurring health problems (in particular epilepsy, sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and irritability) are common. We did not recommend the routine use of any pharmacological treatment for the core symptoms of autism spectrum disorder. In children, melatonin may be useful to treat sleep problems, dopamine blockers for irritability, and methylphenidate, atomoxetine and guanfacine for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. The evidence for use of medication in adults is limited and recommendations are largely based on extrapolations from studies in children and patients without autism spectrum disorder. We discuss the conditions for considering and evaluating a trial of medication treatment, when non-pharmacological interventions should be considered, and make recommendations on service delivery. Finally, we identify key gaps and limitations in the current evidence base and make recommendations for future research and the design of clinical trials.

Facilitated communication and authorship: a systematic review

Facilitated Communication (FC) is a technique whereby individuals with disabilities and communication impairments allegedly select letters by typing on a keyboard while receiving physical support, emotional encouragement, and other communication supports from facilitators. The validity of FC stands or falls on the question of who is authoring the typed messages--the individual with a disability or the facilitator. The International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (ISAAC) formed an Ad Hoc Committee on FC and charged this committee to synthesize the evidence base related to this question in order to develop a position statement. The purpose of this paper is to report this synthesis of the extant peer-reviewed literature on the question of authorship in FC. A multi-faceted search was conducted including electronic database searches, ancestry searches, and contacting selected authors. The authors considered synopses of systematic reviews, and systematic reviews, which were supplemented with individual studies not included in any prior reviews. Additionally, documents submitted by the membership were screened for inclusion. The evidence was classified into articles that provided (a) quantitative experimental data related to the authorship of messages, (b) quantitative descriptive data on the output generated through FC without testing of authorship, (c) qualitative descriptive data on the output generated via FC without testing of authorship, and (d) anecdotal reports in which writers shared their perspectives on FC. Only documents with quantitative experimental data were analyzed for authorship. Results indicated unequivocal evidence for facilitator control: messages generated through FC are authored by the facilitators rather than the individuals with disabilities. Hence, FC is a technique that has no validity.

Facilitated communication since 1995: a review of published studies

Previous reviews of Facilitated Communication (FC) studies have clearly established that proponents' claims are largely unsubstantiated and that using FC as an intervention for communicatively impaired or noncommunicative individuals is not recommended. However, while FC is less prominent than in the recent past, investigations of the technique's efficacy continue. This review examines published FC studies since the previous major reviews by Jacobson, Mulick, and Schwartz (1995) and Simpson and Myles (1995a). Findings support the conclusions of previous reviews. Furthermore, this review critiques and discounts the claims of two studies purporting to offer empirical evidence of FC efficacy using control procedures.