Clinical Reasoning for Speech Sound Disorders: Diagnosis and Intervention in Speech-Language Pathologists' Daily Practice

The impact of age on the treatment of late-acquired sounds in children with speech sound disorders

The question of 'when' to treat speech sounds is often posed in the context of normative data. The new normative data suggest that speech sounds such as /ɹ/ and /l/ are acquired earlier than previously thought. The present study compared the treatment of late-acquired sounds between two age groups of English-speaking children: Young children (4-5) and Old children (7-8). Eight monolingual children with speech sound disorder (SSD) participated in the study. Each child received a criterion-based, standardised, two-phase therapy protocol. Treatment efficacy was measured by examining children's accuracy on real world speech probes. Treatment efficiency was measured by calculating the number of sessions required to meet the exit criterion and the mean session duration. For treatment efficacy, young children learned treated sounds as effectively as oldchildren did. For treatment efficiency, both groups required a comparable number of sessions, but young children required longer sessions than old children. The results suggest that delaying treatment of individual speech sounds is unnecessary and that a range of sounds should be considered as potential treatment targets.

Oral Diadochokinetic Performance on Perceptual and Acoustic Measures for Typically Developing Cantonese-Speaking Preschool Children

PURPOSE

This study investigated native Cantonese-speaking preschool children's diadochokinetic performance, including rate, accuracy, and regularity. The second aim of this study was to examine whether language-specific patterns exist by comparing diadochokinetic rates with the average DKK rate for native English speakers.

METHOD

Sixty-four typically developing preschool children who were native Cantonese speakers participated. The diadochokinetic task administered to the children involved repetitions of monosyllabic, disyllabic, and trisyllabic words and nonsense words. The maximum performance of the children was compared by diadochokinetic rate (number of syllables per second), accuracy (percentage of matched production), and regularity (pairwise variability indexes, known as PVIs).

RESULTS

Monosyllabic units were produced faster, more accurately, and more regularly than multisyllabic units. Word repetition showed higher accuracy and generally lower regularity than nonsense words but similar rates. Older children were faster and more regular (higher raw PVI of initial consonants) than younger children, but younger children performed as accurately as them. When compared with data from English speakers, the diadochokinetic rates of Cantonese children were generally lower.

CONCLUSIONS

Developmental progression was evident in terms of rate and regularity. The distinctive accuracy and regularity patterns between word and nonsense word repetition suggest a clinical value for both stimulus types. Language typology plays a role in diadochokinetic rate, supporting the use of language-specific reference data in practice. The typical diadochokinetic profile obtained in this study could serve as a clinical reference for speech motor assessments.

A Qualitative Analysis of Clinician Perspectives of Ultrasound Biofeedback for Speech Sound Disorders

PURPOSE

Ultrasound biofeedback therapy (UBT) is a relatively new type of technology-assisted speech-language therapy and has shown promise in remediating speech sound disorders. However, there is a current lack of understanding of the barriers and benefits that may influence the usage behavior and clinical decision making for the implementation of UBT from a clinician perspective. In this qualitative study, we explore the perspectives of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who have used ultrasound biofeedback in programs of speech sound therapy using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model.

METHOD

Seven SLPs who had clinical experience treating speech sound disorders with UBT participated. Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted and video-recorded. Two coders coded and categorized the transcribed data, with consensus established with a third coder. Using thematic analysis, the data were exploratorily grouped into themes along components of the UTAUT model.

RESULTS

The highest number of codes was sorted into the "effort expectancy" theme, followed by "performance expectancy," "social influence," and "facilitating conditions" themes of the UTAUT model. Clinicians identified multiple perceived barriers and benefits to the use of ultrasound technology. The top identified barrier was limited accessibility, and the top benefit was the ability to visualize a client's articulatory response to cues on a display.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians prioritized "effort expectancy" and "performance expectancy" when reflecting on the use of ultrasound biofeedback for speech sound disorders. Clinicians spoke favorably about using UBT for speech sound disorder treatment but acknowledged institutional barriers and limitations at organizational and social levels.

A survey of Swedish speech-language pathologists' practices regarding assessment of speech sound disorders

PURPOSE

To explore Swedish clinical practice regarding assessment of suspected Speech Sound Disorders (SSD) in children.

METHODS

A web-based questionnaire, regarding assessment of SSD in children 4;6-6;11 (years; months), was distributed to Swedish speech-language pathologists (SLPs) through social media and online forums. The questions concerned the frequency and manner of assessment for seven assessment components, chosen based on a review of international recommendations for SSD assessment.

RESULTS

A total of 131 SLPs responded to the questionnaire. The results show that Swedish SSD assessment practices vary with regards to the frequency and manner of assessment for many components. Speech output is frequently assessed while speech perception, phonological awareness and oral-motor function are assessed less frequently. A variety of manners of assessment, for example, standardised tests, non-standardised material, and informal assessment procedures, such as observation, are utilized by respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Swedish SSD assessment practices are variable. The present paper reveals areas for development within SLP practice and education programmes, and provides a new perspective on present praxis with regards to the assessment of suspected SSD in Sweden.

Process-Oriented Profiling of Speech Sound Disorders

The differentiation between subtypes of speech sound disorder (SSD) and the involvement of possible underlying deficits is part of ongoing research and debate. The present study adopted a data-driven approach and aimed to identify and describe deficits and subgroups within a sample of 150 four to seven-year-old Dutch children with SSD. Data collection comprised a broad test battery including the Computer Articulation Instrument (CAI). Its tasks Picture Naming (PN), NonWord Imitation (NWI), Word and NonWord Repetition (WR; NWR) and Maximum Repetition Rate (MRR) each render a variety of parameters (e.g., percentage of consonants correct) that together provide a profile of strengths and weaknesses of different processes involved in speech production. Principal Component Analysis on the CAI parameters revealed three speech domains: (1) all PN parameters plus three parameters of NWI; (2) the remaining parameters of NWI plus WR and NWR; (3) MRR. A subsequent cluster analysis revealed three subgroups, which differed significantly on intelligibility, receptive vocabulary, and auditory discrimination but not on age, gender and SLPs diagnosis. The clusters could be typified as three specific profiles: (1) phonological deficit; (2) phonological deficit with motoric deficit; (3) severe phonological and motoric deficit. These results indicate that there are different profiles of SSD, which cover a spectrum of degrees of involvement of different underlying problems.

Speech diagnosis and intervention in children with a repaired cleft palate: A qualitative study of Flemish private community speech-language pathologists' practices

Purpose: This study investigated the practice patterns of private community speech-language pathologists (SLPs) when treating children with a repaired cleft of the palate with or without a cleft of the lip (CP ± L). Practices were explored in terms of diagnostics and treatment focus, treatment dosage and experienced difficulties when treating children with a CP ± L.Method: Eleven female private community SLPs, who lived in Flanders (i.e. the northern part of Belgium) and were aged between 23 and 62 years participated in this study. Data were collected from semi-structured face-to-face interviews. The qualitative software program NVivo 12 was used for data analysis. The interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic approach.Result: SLPs reported a lack of available information on speech-related cleft care. SLPs expressed the need to receive a referral letter from the hospital in order to make an adequate speech diagnosis. Most therapists reported that they performed an articulatory assessment combined with a language assessment. Most SLPs used a hybrid treatment model including a variety of intervention techniques. These techniques were not always in line with available scientific evidence. SLPs reported the desire to receive practical step-by-step guidelines on how to provide speech intervention to children with a CP ± L. In contrast, there was a strong consensus among the therapists that an individualised treatment plan is necessary.Conclusion: The results of this study have revealed gaps in the dissemination and implementation of scientific evidence relevant to speech services for children with a CP ± L (i.e. a research-practice gap) in Flanders. Research evidence needs to be adequately translated into clinical practice by providing concrete and practical guidelines.

Comparing the Informativeness of Single-Word Samples and Connected Speech Samples in Assessing Speech Sound Disorders

Purpose Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are faced with the challenge of quickly and accurately identifying children who present with speech sound disorders (SSD) compared to typically developing (TD) children. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical relevance of two speech sampling methods (single-word vs. connected speech samples) in how sensitive they are in detecting atypical speech sound development in children, and to know whether the information obtained from single-word samples is representative enough of children's overall speech sound performance. Method We compared the speech sound performance of 37 preschool children with SSD (M _age = 4;11 years) and 37 age-sex-matched typically developing children (M _age = 5;0 years) by eliciting their speech in two ways: (a) a picture-naming task to elicit single words, and (b) a story-retelling task to elicit connected speech. Four speech measures were compared across sample type (single words vs. connected speech) and across groups (SSD vs. TD): intelligibility, speech accuracy, phonemic inventory, and phonological patterns. Results Interaction effects were found between sample type and group on several speech sound performance measures. Single-word speech samples were found to differentiate the SSD group from the TD group, and were more sensitive than connected speech samples across various measures. The effect size of single-word samples was consistently higher than connected speech samples for three measures: intelligibility, speech accuracy, and phonemic inventory. The gap in sample type informativeness may be attributed to salience and avoidance effects, given that children tend to avoid producing unfamiliar phonemes in connected speech. The number of phonological patterns produced was the only measure that revealed no gap between two sampling types for both groups. Conclusions On measures of intelligibility, speech accuracy, and phonemic inventory, obtaining a single-word sample proved to be a more informative method of differentiating children with SSD from TD children than connected speech samples. This finding may guide SLPs in their choice of sampling type when they are under time pressure. We discuss how children's performance on the connected speech sample may be biased by salience and avoidance effects and/or task design, and may, therefore, not necessarily reveal a poorer performance than single-word samples, particularly in intelligibility, speech accuracy, and the number of phonological patterns, if these task limitations are circumvented. Our findings show that the performance gap, typically observed between the two sampling types, largely depends on which performance measures are evaluated with the speech sample. Our study is the first to address sampling type differences in SSD versus TD children and has significant clinical implications for SLPs looking for sampling types and measures that reliably identify SSD in preschool-aged children.