Personalized, performance-specific speech intervention in children with a cleft palate: A systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

The provision of speech intervention in children requires personalized, child-tailored approaches. Different speech-intervention approaches exist to eliminate cleft-related speech errors in children with a cleft palate. However, it is unclear what approach works best for the subtypes of cleft-related speech errors.

AIMS

To describe a protocol for a systematic review that provides speech-language pathologists with the current literature concerning more individualized speech intervention in children with a cleft palate.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A systematic literature review was performed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Two speech-language pathologists with clinical and scientific experience in cleft speech searched different electronic databases for relevant studies. No limit regarding publication date was set. Specific eligibility criteria were defined and used to include or exclude the studies. All included studies were evaluated with a risk-of-bias assessment tool and levels of evidence. Relevant data were extracted from the studies (study design, study population characteristics, intervention characteristics and outcome characteristics) and a narrative synthesis was performed.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

The findings of this systematic review will significantly contribute to the evidence on personalized speech intervention in children with a cleft palate. The study will inform speech-language pathologists on the possibilities to tailor treatment plans more to the specific subtype of cleft-related speech errors. The planned systematic review also makes recommendations for further cleft speech intervention research.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject At present, there is growing evidence for different speech therapy approaches in children with a cleft palate. Despite the recognized need for personalized, child-tailored therapy, there is no consensus on the best speech therapy approach per different subtype of compensatory cleft speech characteristic. What this study adds to the existing knowledge This paper provides a protocol for a systematic literature review of this topic. Specifically, it searches the literature for the use of personalized speech therapy approaches in children with different subtypes of compensatory cleft speech characteristics. What are the practical and clinical implications of this work? The systematic literature review provides speech-language pathologists with the current literature concerning personalized, performance-specific speech intervention in children with a cleft palate. Besides, the results will support therapy decision-making in children with a cleft palate in different speech-related clinical contexts.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Assessing Velopharyngeal Function: Current Applications, Barriers, and Potential for Future Clinical Translation in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the assessment process for children with cleft/craniofacial conditions remains uncommon, particularly for velopharyngeal assessments. The purpose of this study was to analyze the perceived clinical utility of MRI for cleft/craniofacial providers and identify barriers that exist for clinical translation of this imaging modality to this population of patients.

METHODS

A 38-item survey was disseminated to craniofacial team providers. Workplace context and demographics, MRI as a research and clinical tool, access and barriers for use of MRI, and needs for successfully establishing MRI protocols at clinical sites were investigated. Descriptive statistics were used to identify differences in the clinical use of MRI across disciplines. Chi-square analyses were conducted to determine how different specialties perceived potential barriers.

RESULTS

Respondents reported that MRI is likely to be beneficial for clinical assessments (93.5%) and that this imaging modality is available for use (83.8%). However, only 11.8% of providers indicated the use of MRI in their clinical assessments. This discrepancy highlights a potential disconnect between perceived use and implementation of this imaging methodology on cleft and craniofacial teams. A number of barriers were identified by providers. Challenges and opportunities for clinical translation of MRI protocols were highlighted.

CONCLUSION

Results may guide the development for improved clinical feasibility and implementation of MRI for clinical planning in this population of patients. Reported barriers highlight additional areas for translational research and the potential for the development of clinical tools related to MRI assessment and protocol implementation.

'Sometimes I feel sad': A qualitative study on children's perceptions with cleft palate speech and language therapy

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based speech therapy involves the integration of (1) the scientific evidence for therapy with (2) the perspectives of clinicians concerning therapy and (3) the perspectives of patients about therapy. The cleft literature has already paid attention to the first two cornerstones of evidence-based speech therapy. Much less is known about how children perceive cleft speech therapy.

AIMS

The purpose of the current qualitative study was to investigate the perceptions, emotions and expectations of Flemish-speaking Dutch children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP ± L), aged 5-12 years, with regard to the speech therapy they receive. In this study, a focus was made on speech therapy to eliminate compensatory cleft speech errors.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Six children with a CP ± L, aged between 5 and 12 years, were included in this study. Child-friendly semi-structured interviews were conducted using a participatory, art-based qualitative approach. This means that the 'play and puppets technique' and 'draw-write and photo-elicitation technique' were used to guide the children through the interviews. Data derived from these interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Trustworthiness of the data was achieved by applying researcher triangulation, negative case analysis and an audit trail.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Analyses of the interviews revealed three major themes of importance to the children: (1) treatment values, (2) treatment practices and (3) treatment outcomes. Each theme was divided into different subthemes. The theme 'treatment values' consisted of the subthemes expectations and emotions around therapy and interference with daily living. Information flow, therapy content, confirmation and rewards, parents' attendance, therapy intensity, and homework were subthemes of the major theme 'treatment practices'. The theme 'treatment outcomes' was divided into two subthemes, namely speech improvement and peers' reactions.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Most children had positive attitudes towards speech therapy: it was 'something they liked' and 'something fun'. If children had negative attitudes they were related to having a fear of making mistakes during therapy. Children had clear expectations of the purpose of speech therapy. Speech therapy should 'help' improve their speech and make it more understandable to others. The children in this sample made some suggestions to decrease the experienced burden related to speech therapy. The results of this study will help to better tailor speech therapy programmes to the needs and experiences of children with a CP ± L.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Evidence-based speech therapy involves the integration of (1) the scientific evidence for therapy with (2) the perspectives of clinicians concerning therapy and (3) the perspectives of patients and their families about therapy. The cleft literature has already paid attention to the first two cornerstones of evidence-based speech therapy. Different studies investigated the perspectives of SLPs and parents with regard to cleft palate speech therapy. However, much less is known about the children's own experiences with and perceptions around this speech therapy. What this study adds to existing knowledge This study used a qualitative research design to investigate the perceptions, emotions and expectations of children with a cleft (lip and) palate, aged 5-12 years, with regard to the speech therapy they receive. Speech therapy needed to focus on the elimination of compensatory speech errors. This study provides knowledge on the speech therapy-related experiences of children with a cleft palate. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Children in this sample made some concrete suggestions to decrease the experienced burden related to cleft speech therapy, for example, integration of school work during therapy sessions and practising on the level of spontaneous speech. The results of this study help us to better tailor speech therapy programmes to the needs and experiences of children with a CP ± L.

How differences in anatomy and physiology and other aetiology affect the way we label and describe speech in individuals with cleft lip and palate

BACKGROUND

Speech in individuals with cleft lip and/or palate (CLP) is a complex myriad of presenting symptoms. It is uniquely associated with the structural difference of velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI), together with a wide and heterogeneous range of other aetiologies which often co-occur. The nature of the speech sound disorder (SSD) including VPI may also change over the course of an individual's care pathway. Differences in terminology and approaches to analysis are currently used, resulting in confusion internationally. Additionally, current diagnostic labels and classification systems in SSD do not capture the complexity and full nature of speech characteristics in CLP.

AIMS

This paper aims to explore the different aetiologies of cleft palate/VPI speech and to relate aetiology with speech characteristic(s). In so doing, it attempts to unravel the different terminology used in the field, describing commonalities and differences, and identifying overlaps with the speech summary patterns used in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. The paper also aims to explore the applicability of current diagnostic labels and classification systems in the non-cleft SSD literature and illustrate certain implications for speech intervention in CLP.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The different aetiologies were identified from the literature and mapped onto cleft palate/VPI speech characteristics. Different terminology and approaches to analysis are defined and overlaps described. The applicability of current classification systems in SSD is discussed including additional diagnostic labels proposed in the field.

OUTCOMES AND RESULTS

Aetiologies of cleft palate/VPI speech identified include developmental (cognitive-linguistic), middle ear disease and fluctuating hearing loss, altered oral structure, abnormal facial growth, VPI-structural (abnormal palate muscle) and VPI-iatrogenic (maxillary advancement surgery). There are four main terminologies used to describe cleft palate/VPI speech: active/passive and compensatory/obligatory, which overlap with the four categories used in the UK speech summary patterns: anterior oral cleft speech characteristics (CSCs), posterior oral CSCs, non-oral CSCs and passive CSCs, although not directly comparable. Current classification systems in non-cleft SSD do not sufficiently capture the full nature and complexity of cleft palate/VPI speech.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our attempt at identifying the heterogeneous range of aetiologies provides clinicians with a better understanding of cleft palate/VPI speech to inform the management pathway and the nature and type of speech intervention required. We hope that the unravelling of the different terminology in relation to the UK speech summary patterns, and those used elsewhere, reduces confusion and provides more clarity for clinicians in the field. Diagnostic labels and classification require international agreement.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Speech associated with cleft palate/velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) is a complex myriad of speech characteristics with a wide and heterogeneous range of aetiologies. Different terminology and speech summary patterns are used to describe the speech characteristics. The traditional classification of cleft palate/VPI speech is Articulation Disorder, although evidence is building for Phonological Disorder and contrastive approaches in cleft speech intervention. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This paper explores the range of aetiologies of cleft palate/VPI speech (e.g., altered oral structure, abnormal facial growth, abnormal palate muscle and iatrogenic aetiologies) and attempts to relate aetiology with speech characteristic(s). An attempt is made at unravelling the different terminology used in relation to a well-known and validated approach to analysis, used in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Complexities of current diagnostic labels and classifications in Speech Sound Disorder to describe cleft palate/VPI speech are discussed. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? There needs to be a common language for describing and summarising cleft palate/VPI speech. Speech summary patterns based on narrow phonetic transcription and correct identification of aetiology are essential for the accurate classification of the speech disorder and identification of speech intervention approaches. There is an urgent need for research to identify the most appropriate type of contrastive (phonological) approach in cleft lip and/or palate.

Where is the Care? Identifying the Impact of Rurality on SLP Caseloads and Treatment Decisions for Children with Cleft Palate

Challenges providing cleft/craniofacial care in rural communities are often reported, leading to disparities in resources available to clinicians. The purpose of this study was to identify the impact of rurality on caseloads and practice patterns of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) regarding speech and velopharyngeal function for children with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P).

A national, survey of US-based SLPs (N = 359 respondents) investigated resources, comfort level, caseloads, and practice patterns for children with CL/P. Sub-county classifications that delineated levels of rurality were utilized. Descriptive statistics and chi-square analyses were conducted to determine the impact of population density on assessment and referral decisions.

Nearly 83% of SLPs reported providing care for a child with CL/P and 41.4% of these SLPs reported five or more children with CL/P on caseload throughout their career. There were no significant differences in rurality of practice setting and the likelihood of treating a child with CL/P. Significant differences were present between rural, town, suburban, and metropolitan-based SLPs regarding available resources (p = 0.035). SLPs in rural settings reported feeling uncomfortable treating children with CL/P compared to those in metropolitan settings (p = 0.02). Distance to the cleft/craniofacial team and comfort levels impacted referral decisions.

Most SLPs report having children with CL/P on caseload regardless of practice location. Rurality impacted assessment and referral decisions, especially surrounding access to resources and comfort levels engaging in team care. Findings have implications for developing support systems and reducing barriers for rural SLPs working with children born with CL/P.

How acceptable is the use of linguistic-phonological intervention in children with cleft palate? A qualitative study in speech therapists

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Even though evidence for the use of linguistic-phonological intervention approaches in children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP±L) is still limited, these approaches are being used by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to treat active or compensatory cleft speech disorders in clinical practice. It is, however, unknown to what extent linguistic-phonological intervention is acceptable to SLPs. The aim of this study is to investigate the retrospective acceptability of linguistic-phonological intervention in children with a CP±L from the perspective of SLPs using the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA).

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A total of 18 female community SLPs, aged between 23 and 63 years, were included in the study. An independent interviewer conducted semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using a deductive coding approach. Statements of the SLPs were related to the seven constructs of the TFA: affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness and self-efficacy.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

The affective attitude and perceived effectiveness of linguistic-phonological intervention differed among the SLPs: some therapists had positive attitudes towards these approaches, while others did not. Positive attitudes were related to the successful use of linguistic-phonological intervention in the past. The construct 'ethicality' revealed that negative attitudes towards these approaches were attributed to the limited available scientific evidence or negative experiences while using these approaches. In contrast, SLPs who had positive attitudes considered these interventions as 'important' and 'valuable'. Some SLPs had negative reflections on linguistic-phonological intervention as these approaches were considered demanding in terms of time needed to gain knowledge on using them in children with a CP±L (constructs 'burden' and 'opportunity costs'). Additionally, some SLPs doubted their self-efficacy to use these approaches in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

The acceptability of linguistic-phonological intervention differed between the SLPs in this sample and was most likely related to their previous experiences with these linguistic-phonological approaches. It is important to increase not only the amount of scientific evidence for linguistic-phonological approaches but also the supply of evidence-based workshops and training courses on this topic. These initiatives should distribute scientific information that is translated into guidelines that are immediately applicable in clinical practice. This may potentially reduce the time-related burden that some SLPs currently experience to gain expertise in this matter. In future research, it is necessary to investigate if there exist differences in acceptability between the different types of linguistic-phonological therapy.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject Linguistic-phonological speech intervention approaches are often used by SLPs to treat active or compensatory cleft speech disorders in clinical practice. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study investigated whether linguistic-phonological intervention cleft speech intervention is acceptable to SLPs. Some therapists had positive attitudes towards these approaches, while others did not. Positive attitudes were related to the successful use of these approaches in the past. If SLPs indicated having negative attitudes, these negative feelings were attributed to the limited available scientific evidence or negative experiences while using these approaches. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work Even though linguistic-phonological speech intervention approaches are being used in clinical practice, these approaches are not always considered acceptable by SLPs. Acceptability could be enhanced by increasing the amount of scientific evidence for linguistic-phonological approaches, but also by increasing the supply of workshops and training courses on this topic. These initiatives should distribute hands-on information that is immediately applicable in clinical practice. This may potentially reduce the time-related burden that some SLPs currently experience to gain expertise in this matter.

Achieving the next level in cleft speech intervention: A protocol of a randomized sham-controlled trial to provide guidelines for a personalized approach in children with cleft palate

BACKGROUND

Compensatory cleft speech disorders can severely impact speech understandability and speech acceptability. Speech intervention is necessary to eliminate these disorders. There is, however, currently no consensus on the most effective speech therapy approach to eliminate the different subtypes of compensatory cleft speech disorders.

AIMS

To compare the immediate, short- and long-term effects of three well-defined speech intervention approaches (i.e., a motor-phonetic approach, a linguistic-phonological approach and a combined phonetic-phonological approach) on the speech and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in Belgian Dutch-speaking children with cleft palate with or without cleft lip (CP±L) and different subtypes of compensatory speech disorders (i.e., anterior oral cleft speech characteristics (CSCs), posterior oral CSCs or non-oral CSCs). Besides, the perceived acceptability of these three speech intervention approaches will be investigated from the perspectives of caregivers and children with a CP±L.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A two-centre longitudinal randomized sham-controlled trial was used. Children were randomly assigned to one of the three intervention programmes and received 10 h of speech intervention divided over 2 weeks. Block randomization was used, stratified by age and gender. Primary outcome measures included perceptual speech outcomes. Secondary outcome measures included patient-reported outcomes.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

The results of this trial will provide speech-language pathologists evidence-based guidelines to better tailor intervention approaches to the specific needs of a child with a defined compensatory speech disorder.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject Speech therapy approaches to address cleft palate speech disorders are broadly divided into two categories: motor-phonetic interventions and linguistic-phonological interventions. Some limited evidence demonstrated the positive effects of these approaches in eliminating compensatory cleft speech disorders. Different studies have reported inter-individual variation, suggesting that one child may benefit more from a particular intervention approach than the other child. Perhaps this variation can be attributed to the specific subtype of compensatory speech disorder (i.e., anterior oral CSC, posterior oral CSC or non-oral CSC). What this paper adds to existing knowledge This paper describes a randomized sham-controlled trial that compared the immediate, short- and long-term effects of three well-defined speech intervention approaches (i.e., a motor-phonetic approach, a linguistic-phonological approach and a combined phonetic-phonological approach) on the speech and HRQoL in Belgian Dutch-speaking children with CP±L and different subtypes of compensatory cleft speech disorders (i.e., anterior oral CSCs, posterior oral CSCs or non-oral CSCs) measured by perceptual and psychosocial outcome measures. Besides, the experienced acceptability of these three speech intervention approaches were investigated from the perspectives of caregivers and children. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This project provides evidence-based knowledge on patient-tailored cleft speech intervention considering both scientific evidence and the perspectives of caregivers and children. The results aid SLPs in better tailoring intervention approaches to the needs of a child with a specific type of compensatory cleft speech disorder.

Speech Intervention for Children With Cleft Palate Using Principles of Motor Learning

PURPOSE

This is a pilot study to apply an articulatory kinematic speech intervention that uses the principles of motor learning (PML) to improve speech and resonance outcomes for children with cleft palate. It is hypothesized that (a) treatment that applies select PML during practice will improve production of treated phonemes, representing both active and inconsistent passive errors, at word level in children with cleft palate; (b) effects of practice on phonemes with active or inconsistent passive errors will generalize to untreated exemplars of treated phonemes; and (c) learning will be retained for at least 1-month posttreatment.

METHOD

A multiple-baseline design across participants combined with a crossover single-case experimental model was used. Participants attended two 8-week blocks of twice-weekly face-to-face speech therapy (40-50 min/treatment) to treat active and inconsistent passive cleft speech errors using articulatory kinematic speech intervention that applied PML. The participants were four children with cleft-type speech errors. The primary dependent variable measured was percentage of words correct across treatment items, generalization items, and control items. Perceptual accuracy of target words was scored. Effect sizes were calculated to quantify the magnitude of treatment effect.

RESULTS

For three children with active and inconsistent passive cleft speech errors and one child with active cleft speech errors and developmental phonological speech errors, this approach resulted in improvements to their treated items and generalization to their untreated items. Inconsistent passive cleft speech errors were particularly responsive to the treatment in the three children who presented with these errors.

CONCLUSION

This Phase I study has shown that articulatory kinematic speech intervention that applies the PML is effective in improving the speech outcomes for children with cleft palate and that there is validity in pursuing further research into this approach.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21644831.

The study on the morphological changes of oropharynx in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate after palatopharyngeal closure

Cleft lip and palate can be treated as one of the most common craniofacial congenital malformations in humans. Such disease influences tens of millions of patients all over the world. Cleft lip and palate deformity affects many important physiological functions, including breathing, swallowing, speech, chewing, and aesthetics. This work focuses on investigating the morphology and airway volume of oropharynx patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate after palatopharyngeal closure. In addition, this work evaluated the similarities and differences between patients with cleft lip and palate and those without such an issue. The employed data, selected from the Department of Stomatology of Xuzhou First People's Hospital, are based on the conical beam CT images. The study sample was divided into two groups: the selected experimental group, who confronted the cleft lip, cleft palate, and velopharyngeal closure surgery, and the selected control group, who are healthy children at the corresponding age. The parameters, including the airway volume, the airway volume of velopharyngeal and oropharyngeal segments, the minimum cross-sectional area of the pharynx, the horizontal plane airway area of the hard palate and soft one, the horizontal airway area of the hyoid bone, and the vertical distance between the hard palate and soft palate, can be measured by Dolphin. These parameters were analyzed with a statistical approach. The analysis of the above-mentioned parameters reveals that the airway volume, the minimum cross-sectional area of the pharynx, the horizontal cross-sectional area of the hyoid, and the distance between the hard palate and soft palate tip in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate show significant differences between the experimental group and the control group. Meanwhile, other parameters, including the horizontal cross-sectional area of the airway in the horizontal plane of the hard palate and the horizontal plane of the soft palate, did not show noticeable differences in the two groups. The patients, who confronted the unilateral complete cleft lip and palate, can improve with the velopharyngeal closure surgery. Furthermore, the length and vertical distance of the soft palate and the volume of each segment of the airway exhibit differences between the experimental group and the control group.

Compensatory Articulation Errors in Patients With Velopharyngeal Dysfunction and Palatal Anomalies

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the frequency and types of compensatory articulations (CAs) in nonsyndromic patients with velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD) and various palatal anomalies and to determine the relationship between the frequency of CAs, type of palatal anomaly, and phonological errors.

METHOD

A total of 783 nonsyndromic, Hebrew-speaking patients with VPD and various palatal anomalies (cleft lip and palate [CLP], cleft palate [CP], submucous CP [SMCP], occult submucous CP [OSMCP], or non-CP) were studied retrospectively. Perceptual VPD tests, including articulation and phonological assessment, were conducted. CAs were described as below the level of the defect in the vocal tract (abnormal backing of oral targets to post-uvular place) or in front of it within the oral cavity (palatalization) and at the velopharyngeal port.

RESULTS

Among 783 patients, 213 (27.2%) had CAs. Most CAs (18.4%) occurred below the level of the defect, followed by CAs at the velopharyngeal port (12.0%) or in front of it (4.9%). No differences were found in the frequency of CAs between patients with CP (47.8%) or CLP (52.6%) and between those with non-CP (13.6%) or OSMCP (14.7%). SMCP patients had lower frequency of CAs (29.8%) than CP (p = .003) and CLP (p =  .002) patients but higher frequency than OSMCP (p = .002) and non-CP (p =  .002) patients did. Among the 783 patients, 247 (31.5%) had phonological errors. A higher frequency of phonological errors was found in patients with CAs (55.4%) compared to those without (22.6%) and in all palatal anomaly groups except CLP (31.4% vs. 23.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

CAs in nonsyndromic patients with VPD remained relatively high in all age groups, up to adulthood. CAs are influenced by inadequate velar length following palatal repair, as well as by oral structural abnormalities, whereas poor muscle function due to OSMCP and/or abnormal size and/or shape of nasopharynx has less influence. Errors produced in front of the velopharyngeal port are influenced by the structural anomaly of CLP. This information may contribute to general phonetic and phonological theories and genetic investigations about CP anomalies.

One Size Doesn't Fit All: A Pilot Study Toward Performance-Specific Speech Intervention in Children With a Cleft (Lip and) Palate

PURPOSE

Speech-language pathologists usually apply a "one size fits all" approach to eliminate compensatory cleft speech characteristics (CSCs). It is necessary to investigate what intervention works best for a particular patient. This pilot study compared the effectiveness of two therapy approaches (a motor-phonetic approach and a linguistic-phonological approach) on different subtypes of compensatory CSCs in Dutch-speaking children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP ± L).

METHOD

Fourteen children with a CP ± L (M _age = 7.71 years) were divided into two groups using block randomization stratified by age, gender, and type of compensatory CSC. Six children received intervention to eliminate anterior oral CSCs (n = 3 motor-phonetic intervention, n = 3 linguistic-phonological intervention). Eight children received intervention to eliminate non-oral CSCs (n = 4 motor-phonetic intervention, n = 4 linguistic-phonological intervention). Each child received 10 hr of speech intervention divided over 2 weeks. Perceptual and psychosocial outcome measures were used to determine intervention effects.

RESULTS

Children who received linguistic-phonological intervention to eliminate anterior oral CSCs had significantly higher correctly produced consonant scores and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores compared to children who received motor-phonetic intervention to eliminate anterior oral CSCs. In the group of children who received intervention to eliminate non-oral CSCs, no significant differences were found in the correctly produced consonant scores nor in the HRQoL scores between the two intervention approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Linguistic-phonological intervention seems to be more appropriate to eliminate anterior oral CSCs. The beneficial effects of linguistic-phonological intervention were less pronounced in children with non-oral CSCs. Perhaps, children with non-oral CSCs benefit more from a hybrid phonetic-phonological approach. This study is a step forward in the provision of performance-specific intervention in children with a CP ± L. Replication in larger samples is needed and will aid to tailor treatment plans to the needs of our patients.

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.

From excitement to self-doubt and insecurity: Speech-language pathologists' perceptions and experiences when treating children with a cleft palate

BACKGROUND

Speech disorders in children with a cleft palate with or without a cleft lip (CP±L) are complex given the magnitude of influencing factors. Providing intervention to eliminate these speech errors is often challenging. Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) might have negative perceptions of the treatment of children with a CP±L.

AIMS

To explore how community SLPs perceive and experience the provision of speech intervention to children with a CP±L.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A total of 18 female community SLPs, aged between 23 and 62 years, were included in this study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted. The interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic approach aiming to identify themes driven by the data. Trustworthiness of the data was achieved by including researcher triangulation (involving three researchers with different research backgrounds) and deviant case analysis of two cases.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Initial responses demonstrated that the community SLPs were excited and enthusiastic to treat children with a CP±L. Expanding on these initial reports, however, they revealed that their excitement turned into professional self-doubt and insecurity when confronted with the treatment challenges inherent with this population. To cope with this self-doubt, they outlined several responsibilities for the cleft team SLPs. They expressed a strong desire to receive confirmation and approval on their treatment practices from more experienced SLPs (i.e., the cleft team SLPs). Their perceptions were dominated by a polarized thinking pattern. Treatment approaches were divided in categories as 'right' or 'wrong' and 'good' or 'bad'.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

The community SLPs are lacking professional confidence when treating children with a CP±L. They put themselves in a subordinate position towards the cleft team SLPs and expect the latter to provide ready-made answers to problems and questions. This expectation can perhaps be explained by their fear of making mistakes during therapy preventing treatment progress. If they handle in accordance with the experts' advice, they cannot blame themselves in cases where no treatment progress is seen. Educational programmes need to pay more attention to gaining professional confidence (in the search for the most optimal treatment approach for each individual patient) rather than merely focusing on competency-based learning tools.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Speech disorders in children with a cleft palate with or without a cleft lip (CP±L) are complex given the magnitude of influencing factors. Providing intervention to eliminate these speech errors is often challenging. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study explored how community SLPs' perceive and experience the provision of speech intervention to children with a CP±L. The perceptions of community SLPs are dominated by a polarized thinking pattern. Treatment approaches are divided into categories as "right" or "wrong" and "good" or "bad". They lack professional confidence when they treat children with a CP±L. The community SLPs put themselves in a subordinate position towards the cleft team SLPs and expect the latter to provide ready-made answers to problems and questions. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Educational programs in speech-language pathology need to pay more attention to gaining professional confidence rather than merely focusing on competency-based learning tools.

Non-Oral Compensatory Misarticulations Revisited

Non-oral compensatory misarticulation patterns are often associated with the speech of children with cleft palate. Despite their saliency, the etiology, frequency, and treatment of these misarticulations have not been studied extensively. The purpose of this commentary is to review what we know about these atypical patterns of articulation and address clinical assumptions regarding their etiology and treatment.

The Use of Nonspeech Oral Motor Exercises in the Treatment of Children With Cleft Palate: A Re-Examination of Available Evidence

Purpose The purpose of this tutorial is to re-examine the current literature on nonspeech oral motor exercise (NSOME) in general and its use in the treatment of children with cleft palate specifically and provide a best practice recommendation. Method The Population Intervention Comparison Outcome process was used to investigate the clinical question. This systematic framework identifies the clinical population, evaluates the intervention(s) applied to the population, assesses the results of interventions, and delineates the outcome. A literature search, which examined developmental research, applied clinical research, and systematic treatment reviews, was conducted for this purpose. Results The literature reviewed herein suggests that, on a number of different levels, the implementation of NSOMEs does not result in positive communication outcomes for children with cleft palate who present with velopharyngeal dysfunction or compensatory speech errors. Conclusion Based on the current review, there is no empirical support for the use of NSOME as a direct or adjunct treatment for velopharyngeal dysfunction or compensatory speech errors. Appropriate treatments for these communication disorders include surgical, dental, and speech-based interventions.

Sociodemographic Predictors of Patient Age at Time of Cleft Lip and Palate Repair

Objective:

To identify the impact of sociodemographic and health variables on the age at which patients undergo cleft lip repair, cleft palate repair, and primary speech evaluation.

Design:

A retrospective, noninterventional quality assessment, and quality improvement study was designed.

Setting:

This institutional study was performed at Michigan Medicine in Ann Arbor, MI.

Patients:

All patients born between 2011 and 2014 who received surgical cleft repair, excluded those who were adopted (n = 165).

Main Outcome Measure:

The age at which patients undergo cleft lip repair, cleft palate repair, and primary speech evaluation.

Results:

Cleft lip repair was performed significantly later for patients identifying as Asian (18 weeks, P = .01), patients with Child Protective Services contact (19 weeks, P = .01), patients with a significant comorbidity (14 weeks, P = .02), and patients who underwent preliminary lip adhesion surgery (19 weeks, P < .01). Cleft palate repair was performed significantly later for patients identifying racially as Asian (19 weeks, P = .03) and other (22 weeks, P = .03). Preliminary speech and language evaluation were performed significantly later for patients identifying as black (55 weeks, P = .03) and patients diagnosed with an isolated cleft lip (71 weeks, P < .01).

Conclusions:

Timing of cleft lip, cleft palate repair, and primary speech and language evaluation are subject to variation which may be predicted by clinically accessible factors. By identifying race, Child Protective Services contact, and care variables as significant predictors of increased patient age at time of intervention, multidisciplinary cleft care teams can proactively allocate patient support resources.

Psychosocial and Sexual Implications of Repaired Cleft Lip in an Adult Male

We describe the case of a 32-year-old man with repaired cleft lip complaining of sexual difficulties, which were determined to be multifactorial in origin. A negative body impression, anatomical difficulty in engaging in sexual acts, the indirect impact of secondary complications of cleft lip, and the negative perception of his dysmorphia from potential sexual partners led to his current state. Cleft lip and palate (CLP) are the most common malformations of the craniofacial region. The malformations of anatomical structures involved in CLP can manifest through several variations of clinical features and phenotypes, typically affecting hearing, social integration, speech, and feeding. From birth to the end of growth, a multidisciplinary approach involving orthodontists, speech therapists, psychologists, and social workers is essential for adequate management, even after surgical repair. This case report illustrates the critical importance of the functionality of normal lips essential for sexual function and psychosocial issues encountered in a patient with repaired cleft lip, as this issue likely has a higher prevalence than the literature actually suggests. Adding a psychiatrist on the panel for pediatric reconstructive surgery teams and post-repair rehabilitation would be essential to managing potential sexual and psychological issues into adulthood.

Home and Clinical Literacy Practices for Children With Cleft Lip and Palate

Objective:

The purpose of this study was to examine experiences and practices related to supporting literacy development and preventing reading difficulties in children with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P).

Methods:

Via online surveys, 67 respondents including 35 parents/guardians of children with CL/P and 32 speech-language pathologists (SLPs) answered questions about home literacy practices, clinical practices, and perceptions of SLPs’ role in literacy.

Results:

The variability in responses highlights both the positive contributions of parents/guardians and SLPs in supporting literacy development and preventing reading disabilities in children with cleft and the need for increased education and efforts to meet their literacy needs.

Applying the ICF-CY to Specialist Speech-Language Pathologists’ Practice With Toddlers With Cleft Palate Speech

Objective:

To evaluate how the practice of specialist speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with young children with cleft palate ± cleft lip (CP±L) maps onto the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health – Children and Youth version (ICF-CY) and consider the functionality of the categories of the ICF-CY for this specialist area of practice.

Design:

Cross-sectional, qualitative study.

Setting:

Semistructured face-to-face interviews were conducted with SLPs working in tertiary-level hospitals, universities, and public clinics.

Participants:

Six specialist SLPs with 17 to 39 years of experience working with young children with CP±L as researchers and clinicians in Australia, Brazil, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United States.

Main Outcome Measure(s):

Specialists’ practices were captured using in-depth, semistructured interviews. Data collected were analyzed by directed content analysis applying the ICF-CY as a coding schema.

Results:

In total, 4077 data points were coded. Most mapped onto Body Structures (684, 16.8%), Body Functions (906, 22.2%), and Environmental Factors (1626, 39.9%) with less emphasis on Activities and Participation (560, 13.7%). A “best fit” approach was taken to topics that did not map exactly onto categories of the ICF-CY (eg, velopharyngeal insufficiency [VPI]); however, there was not always an ideally suitable category available.

Conclusions:

The current study revealed strengths and challenges in categorizing practice within the ICF-CY for children with CP±L, including collaboration with parents and significant others, specificity around speech, language, and articulation, and the different types of VPI. Therefore, future discussion around how best to use the framework with children with CP±L is needed.