International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology最新文献

Purpose: Assessment allows speech-language pathologists to identify clients' strengths and needs while laying the foundation for the therapeutic relationship. However, the extent to which parents' experiences with assessment has been explored in the literature is unclear. The purposes of this review were to: a) Identify and summarise the available literature on parents' experiences with speech-language assessment for their preschool-aged children, and b) identify gaps in the literature.

Method: Using an established framework for scoping reviews, the authors conducted a search of seven databases including literature up to April 2024. Two researchers independently reviewed articles for inclusion and discussed discrepancies, and a third researcher provided input when consensus could not be reached. Data extracted included study aims, participant information, and the aspects of the assessment process including the lead-up to the assessment, the assessment itself, receiving a diagnosis, and interim supports following the assessment.

Result: Ten studies met inclusion criteria, however, only three studies were focussed on parents' experiences with speech-language assessment.

Conclusion: In the included studies, aspects of assessment have been addressed but with limited depth and breadth. To date, the perspectives studied have primarily been those of monolingual, English-speaking mothers. Proposed reporting considerations are discussed, and clinical and research implications are explored.

Purpose: To evaluate current oral care practices in an acute aged care hospital setting, and staff perceptions of the barriers and enablers to delivery of evidence-based oral care practices.

Method: A mixed method study comprised of retrospective file audit and cross-sectional survey was conducted within a single acute aged care unit. Medical records of patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted over a 6 month period were retrospectively audited. A clinician survey was used to explore barriers to and enablers of the delivery of oral care practices using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B) questionnaire. Result were analysed using descriptive statistics.

Result: Patient file audits (n = 206) found 13.6% (n = 28) of patients had oral care completed, despite 23% (n = 47) of patients being recommended by a speech language pathologist to receive oral care. Staff survey respondents (n = 31) reported they do not have the physical or social opportunities to provide oral care (i.e. adequate resources, time, and social support), however, they were motivated and reported they have the required knowledge and skills to provide oral care.

Conclusion: There is a need for implementation strategies to enable an interprofessional response to improve the delivery of evidence-based oral care practices and optimise patient outcomes.

Purpose: Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) work in Australian schools yet, little is documented about their service delivery practices. This study therefore explores Australian speech-language pathology service delivery in schools, inclusive of work activities, caseloads, and assessment and intervention practices.

Method: An online survey comprising multiple choice, constant sum, Likert scale, and open text questions was completed by 105 SLPs. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics while open-text responses were analysed using content analysis.

Result: Participants were predominantly government education department employees working in multiple schools, and caseloads ranged from 10 to 240 students for full-time SLPs. While responses varied considerably, some general trends emerged. Most time was spent on intervention, followed by non-contact tasks, and assessments, with differences across employment sectors. Language was the most common student need, followed by literacy and speech. Frequently reported factors contributing to client complexity and intervention frequency were co-occurring presentations, severity of student needs, caseload size, and impact on learning. Caseload manageability was a concern for participants who reported larger caseloads, spent more time in assessment or less time in therapy than others, and worked in education departments.

Conclusion: Findings have implications for policy makers, professional bodies and employers, and provide direction for future systematic data collection.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore whether a fast mapping task embedded in an Android application (FastMApp) is a valid tool to assess referent selection abilities in Spanish-speaking children aged between 18 and 30 months. Traditional assessment tools for lexical development use static quantitative methods that assign children a final score to represent their overall vocabulary level. These methods fail to provide insights into the learning process, despite their potential relevance for clinical and educational purposes.

Method: Sixty Spanish-speaking children participated in this study. They completed the FastMApp (a 22-trials' fast mapping noun task including 4- and 5-item trials, with one unknown object), and their caregivers rated their child's vocabulary on a parent-rated vocabulary inventory measure.

Result: The data show a high percentage of responses to the task, indicating that the children were actively complied with the task. The scores for known labels are significantly higher compared to unknown labels, and the scores for 4-item trials are significantly higher compared to 5-item trials. We observed a strong and significant relationship between the scores in this task and the scores on the parent-rated vocabulary inventory measure.

Conclusion: The results suggest that FastMApp is suitable for assessing early vocabulary acquisition in Spanish-speaking children.

Purpose: Dysphagia is a swallowing condition which has significant health and quality of life implications. Speech-language pathologists provide assessment and support shared decision making to optimise swallowing safety. Many people elect to eat and drink with acknowledged risk. This study aimed to explore multidisciplinary team members' perceptions and experiences supporting eating and drinking at acknowledged risk decision-making and practice, and to determine resources needed to support teams in this area.

Method: Semi-structured focus groups and one interview were facilitated with multidisciplinary team members (N = 32) from across the continuum of care at a regional health service to explore perceptions and experiences in supporting eating and drinking at acknowledged risk and identify needs to implement best practice.

Result: Four themes were constructed from the data highlighting the complexity and cyclical nature of supporting eating and drinking at acknowledged risk decision-making and practice. Themes included dynamic shared decision-making, communicating effectively to support and inform eating and drinking at acknowledged risk decision-making, enabling eating and drinking at acknowledged risk in practice, and risks and implications for clinicians and staff.

Conclusion: Best practice eating and drinking at acknowledged risk decision-making and implementation in healthcare and aged care settings is complex. Effective communication and appropriate support for staff working in this area is crucial, given the clinical, ethical, and moral implications that arise when supporting people who elect to eat and drink at acknowledged risk.

Purpose: To discuss how clinically important mental health is during management of early stuttering. To inform early-career clinicians and students of speech-language pathology about contemporary views on this issue.

Method: The issue was discussed by three speech-language pathologists and a clinical psychologist. Written conversational turns in an exchange were limited to 100 words each. When that written dialogue was concluded, the moderator summarised the discussion.

Result: All agreed that it is essential to take account of mental health during management of early stuttering.

Conclusion: The following key points were raised: a) There is a prominent risk that a child with early stuttering will be or will become socially anxious, b) parent anxiety is a clinical consideration, c) support and counselling of children and parents needs to be within the scope of speech-language pathology practice, and d) referral of a child or parent, or both, to a clinical psychologist may be required, facilitated by formal testing if needed.

Purpose: Interest is growing for collaborative approaches in speech-language pathology. How these approaches can be achieved with families is less commonly discussed in research. This study explores speech-language pathologists' perspectives and experiences in implementing collaborative approaches with children and families in clinical and research settings.

Method: An online survey was conducted to explore questions: 1) What do speech-language pathologists perceive to be the core elements of collaborative approaches with children and families? and, 2) How do speech-language pathologists implement collaborative approaches in practice? Qualitative Content Analysis informed findings about categories and frequency of important elements.

Result: Findings show that speech-language pathologist knowledge, skills, and confidence, as well as advocacy and resourcing of services and systems, are required for implementation. Strategies centred on collaborative decision-making, with further emphasis on how communication occurs, facilitation of an identified collaborative approach, and relationships between all involved.

Conclusion: Findings contribute to literature through a focus on how collaborative approaches are implemented with children and families, and using Qualitative Content Analysis, what is most important in speech-language pathology. Findings strengthen collective understanding of implementation and bring focus to an often-tacit process and knowledge, which serves to democratise clinical and research practice.

Purpose: Collaborative research projects frequently include team members with different perspectives and backgrounds. Although qualitative research literature addresses the challenges of navigating so-called insider and outsider perspectives in such projects, research in the speech-language pathology field does not typically explore situations where positionality is entangled, requiring researchers to navigate multiple perspectives.

Method: Using first-person accounts as illustrative examples, we describe our experiences in a multidisciplinary collaborative study of student speech-language pathology telepractice, where our multiple perspectives as therapists, clinical educators, and researchers posed challenges to the analytic process.

Result: Our reflections revealed the complexity of our positionality within our disciplinary experiences. While we identified with students, we simultaneously recognised the limits of our understanding of their experiences. This positioned us as both insiders and outsiders. At times, we functioned as "extreme insiders", given the multiple roles we brought to the project. Additionally, we grappled with the responsibility of honouring participants' vulnerability.

Conclusion: Research is enhanced by multidisciplinary teamwork, but this requires ongoing reflection on positionality. We offer recommendations for navigating multiple perspectives and untangling positionality, with suggestions for other researchers and therapists engaging in similar collaborative explorations. The same lens may be useful for teaching and clinical work.

Purpose: This systematic review examined the effectiveness and instructional characteristics of morphological awareness interventions for children aged 3 to 12 diagnosed with Developmental Language Disorder, in English- or Spanish-speaking contexts. It aimed to determine the outcomes of MA interventions and identify the instructional components most supported by evidence.

Method: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across five major databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and ERIC) between September and November 2024. Ten studies published between 1980 and 2024 met the inclusion criteria. The review synthesised results concerning both intervention outcomes and instructional features, using Frizelle and McKean's (2022) Dose Form Framework.

Result: Only four studies reported statistically significant improvements in morphological awareness, with large effect sizes, indicating potential benefits of morphological awareness interventions for children with Developmental Language Disorder. However, many studies lacked rigorous methodology or failed to disaggregate outcomes for children with Developmental Language Disorder, limiting generalizability. Interventions with the strongest evidence base were those using explicit, clinician-directed instruction targeting affix identification and word construction.

Conclusion: The findings suggest promising but limited evidence supporting the effectiveness of morphological awareness interventions for children with Developmental Language Disorder. Further high-quality, controlled studies with detailed statistical reporting and consistent diagnostic labelling are needed. Structured, explicit instruction appears to be a critical feature of effective programs and should be prioritised in clinical and educational practice.

Purpose: Increased migration has created challenges for speech-language pathology clinicians in assessing multilingual children in countries such as the Republic of Ireland, where most clinicians practice through the dominant societal language, English. This study aims to understand their practices and perspectives regarding assessment of multilingual children.

Method: In total,131 clinicianss participated in an anonymised online survey that explored clinicians language assessment practices and perspectives of multilingual children through multiple-choice and rating questions. Three open-ended questions were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Result: A total of 127 clinicians (96.9%) reported using monolingual standardised assessment with multilingual children, while 120 clinicians (91.6%) indicated available multilingual assessment tools were not adequate. Clinicians reported using standardised assessments when multilingual assessments were inaccessible, children had adequate exposure to English, or to access services. Clinicians reported reduced knowledge of typical versus atypical multilingual language development and limited training as challenges to assessment.

Conclusion: Challenges in language assessment of multilingual children creates a distinctive mismatch between best practice guidelines and clinical practice. Comparable assessment tools and information related to typical versus atypical error patterns for specific language pairings, which can be accessed by clinicians for qualitative analysis of language samples, could bridge this gap.