Subtract Before You Add: Toward the Development of a De-Implementation Approach in School-Based Speech Sound Therapy

PURPOSE

It is often difficult for school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to prioritize implementing new practices for children with speech sound disorders (SSDs), given burgeoning caseloads and the myriad of other workload tasks. We propose that de-implementation science is equally as important as implementation science. De-implementation science is the recognition and identification of areas that are of "low-value and wasteful." Critically, the idea of de-implementation suggests that we first remove something from a clinician's workload before requesting that they learn and implement something new.

METHOD

Situated within the Sustainability in Healthcare by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) framework, we review de-implementation science and current speech sound therapy literature to understand the mechanisms behind continuous use of practices that are no longer supported by science or legislation. We use vignettes to highlight real-life examples that clinicians may be facing in school-based settings and to provide hypothetical solutions, resources, and/or next steps to these common challenges.

RESULTS

By focusing on Phase 1 of the SHARE framework, we identified four primary practices that can be de-implemented to make space for new evidence-based techniques and approaches. These four practices were determined based on an in-depth review of SLP-based survey research: (a) overreliance on speech sound norms for eligibility determinations, (b) the omission of phonological processing skills within evaluations, (c) homogeneity of service delivery factors, and (d) the use of only one treatment approach for all children with SSDs.

CONCLUSIONS

De-implementation will take work and may lead to some difficult discussions. Implementing a framework, such as SHARE, can guide SLPs toward a reduction in workloads and improved outcomes for children with SSDs.

Facing a Clinical Challenge: Limited Empirical Support for Toddler Speech Sound Production Intervention Approaches

PURPOSE

Speech sound production intervention in early childhood is relatively rare despite empirical and theoretical support for providing this type of targeted therapy for toddlers. Challenges perpetuate the present clinical condition including those related to treatment decision making (e.g., intervention approach).

METHOD

Although there are numerous speech sound production treatment approaches appropriate for the pediatric population, a much smaller proportion are proposed to be appropriate for children under the age of 3 years. Of these, five approaches (i.e., core vocabulary, cycles, naturalist recast, stimulability, and psycholinguistic intervention) were selected for review because they can be used to treat functional speech sound disorders produced by toddlers and none required additional clinician training for implementation.

RESULTS

We found the empirical evidence supporting the use of these approaches with children under the age of 3 years scant to nonexistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the lack of empirical evidence, early intervention speech-language pathologists must primarily rely on internal factors (e.g., clinician experience and client/caregiver perspectives) to support evidence-based intervention decisions in the absence of external empirical support. Clinical action steps such as careful documentation of approaches used/discontinued and associated individual client outcomes are necessary for evidence-based decision making until more robust empirical evidence is established.