The Efficacy of Telepractice Intervention for Children & Adolescents with Speech, Language & Hearing Impairments: a Meta-Analysis

A qualitative study assessing allied health provider perceptions of telepractice functionality in therapy delivery for people with disability

INTRODUCTION

Telepractice service delivery of allied health interventions to people with disability can potentially reduce access barriers and improve service equity. However, questions remain regarding telepractice functionality for people with disability. This study addressed questions related to how allied health clinicians and managers perceive telepractice as functioning in the provision of therapy services to people with disability.

METHODS

Thirteen interviews of allied health clinicians and managers from across Australia were conducted between 21 November and 22 February via MS teams. Qualitative methodology and critical realist theoretical paradigm underpin the study. Data analysis was completed using a reflective thematic analysis method and five themes were generated and described utilising an analytic metaphor.

RESULTS

The study themes were described in relation to a shopping for shoes analytic metaphor and the five themes included (1) a shoe for every foot, (2) planned purchases, (3) shoe on the other foot, (4) you need both shoes and (5) help choosing their shoes. In summary, the function of telepractice fits differently for each individual, similar to pairs of shoes.

CONCLUSIONS

Telepractice has its own strengths and weaknesses and isn't a direct substitute for in-person sessions, much like left and right shoes are similar but not the same. The results support participant perceptions that telepractice functions best as an adjunct to in-person sessions through a flexible hybrid delivery model in the provision of therapy services to people with a disability. A strategy for improving perceived usefulness may involve positioning telepractice as unique with strengths and weaknesses, not replacing in-person care.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The paper forms part of a larger codesign process which included customer and carer participants throughout the design and planning of the project, inclusion of a peer researcher, and the selection of the analytic metaphor including in the findings of this article production.

Traditional and Visual-Acoustic Biofeedback Treatment via Telepractice for Residual Speech Sound Disorders Affecting /ɹ/: Pilot study

Purpose

This study aimed to examine the feasibility of telepractice delivery of a treatment package including visual-acoustic biofeedback and motor-based treatment for residual speech sound disorder affecting /ɹ/ in school-age children. The overall study used a single-case randomization design; however, this preliminary report will simply quantify changes in accuracy before and after completion of the treatment package. The present analysis did not differentiate between the relative contributions of biofeedback and motor-based treatments.

Method

Seven children aged 9-14 received speech therapy for /ɹ/ distortions via telepractice. The study design consisted of three phases: baseline (four sessions), treatment (20 sessions), and post-treatment (three sessions). Treatment included two sessions weekly for a duration of 10 weeks. The participants received one motor-based/non-biofeedback session and one visual-acoustic biofeedback session per week. The order of treatment within each week was randomly determined prior to the start of therapy. Overall progress was assessed using untrained listeners' ratings of word probes administered in the baseline and posttreatment phases.

Results

Findings revealed that six of the seven participants showed a clinically significant response to the overall treatment package, although the magnitude of individual responses varied across speech contexts (consonantal and vocalic) and participants.

Conclusion

The present results suggest that a treatment combining visual-acoustic biofeedback and motor-based treatment for residual /ɹ/ errors treatment can be effectively delivered via telepractice. Considerations for technology setup and treatment protocols are provided.

Digital Health and Digital Learning Experiences Across Speech-Language Pathology, Phoniatrics, and Otolaryngology: Interdisciplinary Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Advances in digital health and digital learning are transforming the lives of patients, health care providers, and health professional students. In the interdisciplinary field of communication sciences and disorders (CSD), digital uptake and incorporation of digital topics and technologies into clinical training programs has lagged behind other medical fields. There is a need to understand professional and student experiences, opinions, and needs regarding digital health and learning topics so that effective strategies for implementation can be optimized.

OBJECTIVE

This cross-sectional survey study aims to interdisciplinarily investigate professional and student knowledge, use, attitudes, and preferences toward digital health and learning in the German-speaking population.

METHODS

An open-ended, web-based survey was developed and conducted with professionals and students in CSD including phoniatricians and otolaryngologists, speech-language pathologists (German: Logopäd*innen), medical students, and speech-language pathology students. Differences in knowledge, use, attitudes, and preferences across profession, generation, and years of experience were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 170 participants completed the survey. Respondents demonstrated greater familiarity with digital learning as opposed to eHealth concepts. Significant differences were noted across profession (P<.001), generation (P=.001), and years of experience (P<.001), which demonstrated that students and younger participants were less familiar with digital health terminology. Professional (P<.001) and generational differences were also found (P=.04) in knowledge of digital therapy tools, though no significant differences were found for digital learning tools. Participants primarily used computers, tablets, and mobile phones; non-eHealth-specific tools (eg, word processing and videoconferencing applications); and digital formats such as videos, web courses, and apps. Many indicated a desire for more interactive platforms, such as virtual reality. Significant differences were found across generations for positive views toward digitalization (P<.001) and across profession for feelings of preparedness (P=.04). Interestingly, across profession (P=.03), generation (P=.006), and years of experience (P=.01), students and younger participants demonstrated greater support for medical certification. Commonly reported areas of concern included technical difficulties, quality and validity of digital materials, data privacy, and social presence. Respondents tended to prefer blended learning, a limited to moderate level of interactivity, and time and space-flexible learning environments (63/170, 37.1%), with a notable proportion still preferring traditional time and space-dependent learning (49/170, 28.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive investigation into the current state of CSD student and professional opinions and experiences has shown that incorporation of digital topics and skills into academic and professional development curricula will be crucial for ensuring that the field is prepared for the ever-digitalizing health care environment. Deeper empirical investigation into efficacy and acceptance of digital learning and practice strategies and systematic training and practical organizational supports must be planned to ensure adaptive education and practice.