American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology最新文献

Purpose: Both developmental language disorder (DLD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) represent relatively common and chronic neurodevelopmental conditions associated with increased risk for poor academic and interpersonal outcomes. Reports of common co-occurrence suggest these neurodevelopmental disruptions might also be linked. Most of the data available on the issue have been based on case-control studies vulnerable to ascertainment and other biases.

Method: Seventy-eight children, representing four neurodevelopmental profiles (DLD, ADHD, co-occurring ADHD + DLD, and neurotypical development), were administered a battery of psycholinguistic tests. Parents provided standardized ratings of the severity of their children's inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity, and executive function symptoms. Examiners were blinded to children's clinical status. Group differences, correlations, and best subset regression analyses were used to examine potential impacts of children's ADHD symptoms on their psycholinguistic abilities.

Results: For children with DLD, significant links between their ADHD symptoms and psycholinguistic abilities were limited to the contributions of elevated hyperactivity/impulsivity symptoms to lower pragmatic abilities. For children without DLD, inattention symptoms contributed to lower levels of performance in pragmatic, sentence recall, receptive vocabulary, and narrative abilities.

Discussion: Links among children's ADHD symptoms and their psycholinguistic abilities were different for children with and without DLD. Implications for the provision of clinical services are discussed.

Purpose: To establish the extent to which person-centered processes are integrated in assessment procedures, the Relationship, Assessment, Inclusion, Support, Evolve (R.A.I.S.E.) Assessment framework was used to evaluate measures that are typically used when assessing people living with primary progressive aphasia (PPA).

Method: Forty-five assessment tools were evaluated through the lens of the five R.A.I.S.E. principles: building the client-clinician Relationship, Assessment choices, Including the client and care partners, providing Support, and Evolving procedures to match client capability and progression. The principles were operationalized as questions for raters to evaluate whether a measure met this aspect of the R.A.I.S.E. Assessment framework.

Results: Ten measures commonly used in the assessment of people living with PPA met all R.A.I.S.E. principles. These measures centered upon the elicitation of naturalistic discourse, conversation, client self-report, and clinician ratings. Thirteen measures did not meet any of the criteria, and represented standardized evaluation procedures do not provide the opportunity to connect to the client, elicit or provide feedback or support, nor to adapt in response to need or performance.

Conclusions: Whether using standardized or informal assessment tools, a relational and qualitative approach to providing assessment is paramount to promote client success and therapeutic engagement. We provide guidance through the R.A.I.S.E. framework on practices to cultivate person-centered processes of assessment in the care of people living with PPA.

Purpose: This study investigates changes in the prevalence and practice of simulation in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) education. It is a follow-up to a 2015 survey on the same topic. Given the changes in program certification standards and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical education programs across the United States, re-examination of simulation in CSD is warranted.

Method: An online questionnaire was developed to survey university programs accredited by the Council on Academic Accreditation of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. University program directors and clinical directors received recruitment e-mails using QuestionPro, an online survey platform. The recruitment e-mail contained the purpose of the study and a link to the online questionnaire along with instructions to forward the survey to the appropriate designee. The consent form was then embedded in the questionnaire.

Results: The results of this survey indicated changes in patterns and the use of simulation in clinical education for CSD. Results indicated an overall increase in the use of simulations, specifically in computer-based simulations. Distance simulation as a hybrid technology proved a major addition to clinical education programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. External and internal factors affecting the use of simulations in CSD were identified.

Conclusions: The use of simulation to supplement clinical education in CSD has evolved in recent years. These changes are likely due in part to changes in certification standards in the profession, an increase in awareness and training, and reliance on distance simulation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to characterize the differences between respiration and swallowing in patients with dysphagia after cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) and to explore the underlying physiological changes.

Method: A total of 95 participants were recruited for bedside swallowing evaluation followed by a flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing and surface electromyography with a thermocouple nasal airflow sensor examination: 32 with dysphagia, 33 without dysphagia, and 30 healthy controls. The differences in respiratory patterns, swallowing apnea duration (SAD), inspiratory-expiratory ratio, and swallowing efficiency were observed among healthy adults, CSCI patients with and without dysphagia after CSCI.

Results: Compared with those of healthy controls and patients without dysphagia after CSCI, the postswallow respiratory pattern of patients with dysphagia after CSCI was an inspiratory pattern, and the SAD was significantly shorter in patients with dysphagia after CSCI (p < .001). Additionally, the expiratory time in patients with dysphagia was significantly shorter than the inspiratory time, and the swallowing efficiency was reduced, requiring multiple swallows. Moreover, the index of SAD was statistically significant for predicting the development of dysphagia in patients with CSCI (p < .001).

Conclusion: Patients with CSCI have an inspiratory pattern after swallowing, and the SAD is significantly reduced; SAD can be used as the predictor of dysphagia in patients after CSCI; the pattern of coordination between respiration and swallowing in patients with dysphagia after CSCI is different from that of healthy controls and patients without dysphagia after CSCI.

Supplemental material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.26524717.

Purpose: Scientific transparency and rigor are essential for the successful translation of knowledge in clinical research. However, the field of oropharyngeal dysphagia research lacks guidelines for methodological design and reporting, hindering accurate interpretation and replication. This article introduces the Framework for RigOr aNd Transparency In REseaRch on Swallowing (FRONTIERS), a new critical appraisal tool intended to support optimal study design and results reporting. The purpose of introducing FRONTIERS at this early phase is to invite pilot use of the tool and open commentary.

Methods: FRONTIERS was developed by collaborating researchers and trainees from six international dysphagia research labs. Eight domains were identified, related to study design, swallowing assessment methods, and oropharyngeal dysphagia intervention reporting. Small groups generated questions capturing rigor and transparency for each domain, based on examples from the literature. An iterative consensus process informed the refinement and organization of primary and subquestions, culminating in the current initial version of FRONTIERS.

Results: FRONTIERS is a novel tool, intended for use by oropharyngeal dysphagia researchers and research consumers across disciplines. A web application enables provisional use of the tool, and an accompanying survey solicits feedback regarding the framework.

Conclusion: FRONTIERS seeks to foster rigor and transparency in the design and reporting of oropharyngeal dysphagia research. We encourage provisional use and invite user feedback. A future expert consensus review is planned to incorporate feedback. By promoting scientific rigor and transparency, we hope that FRONTIERS will support evidence-based practice and contribute to improved health outcomes for individuals with oropharyngeal dysphagia.

Purpose: Treatment fatigue is a complex, multidimensional, multicausal, and subjective phenomenon that is not yet well explored and understood in the area of speech therapy. The purpose of this study was to investigate speech-related treatment fatigue and speech treatment dropout in parents and children with a cleft (lip and) palate receiving or having received speech treatment for cleft-related articulation disorders.

Method: Thirteen participants were included in this study (n = seven parents with a median age of 40 years and n = six children with a median age of 10 years). Qualitative semistructured interviews were conducted separately with parents and children to investigate their experiences with cleft speech treatment. An inductive thematic approach was used to analyze the data and construct different themes. Rigor of the data was verified by conducting an investigator triangulation and by performing member checks.

Results and conclusions: The analyses of the interviews yielded three major themes of importance to the children and their parents: (a) physical symptoms of treatment fatigue, (b) psychological symptoms of treatment fatigue, and (c) from treatment fatigue to treatment dropout. Physical symptoms of treatment fatigue were mainly related to transportation burden. On a psychological level, speech treatment may potentially lead to a cognitive-emotional overload. These feelings are primarily related to the practical issue of scheduling required treatment sessions in the family agenda. The decision to discontinue speech treatment was reported to be multifactorial. In this decision-making process, data suggested that the child's perspective must be heard more.

Purpose: In the field of dysphagia research, there is a need to establish a framework for the critical appraisal of methodological reporting. A working group was formed to develop a tool to aid in such critical appraisal across various domains of dysphagia research (called the FRONTIERS [Framework for RigOr aNd Transparency In REseaRch on Swallowing] Framework). The goal of the current paper is to present and describe one domain of this tool: noninstrumental assessment and screening tools.

Method: Methods describing the development of the FRONTIERS Framework and the associated tool are detailed in the prologue of this series.

Results: A set of questions specific to the critical appraisal of transparency and rigor of research involving noninstrumental screening and assessment tools was developed. This included 13 "yes/no" questions, each of which is presented with a rationale for its inclusion and an example of its implementation.

Conclusions: The use of this framework will serve researchers and those appraising the quality of research that uses noninstrumental dysphagia assessment and screening tools. More broadly, the FRONTIERS Framework will facilitate improved rigor and transparency across dysphagia research. Special considerations and future goals are discussed.

Purpose: Interactive songs are a common shared activity for many families and within early childhood classrooms. These activities have the potential to be rich sources of vocabulary input for children with and without language impairments. However, little information is known about the how caregivers currently provide input for different types of vocabulary during these activities. The purpose of this research note is to provide preliminary information on how caregivers provide input related to verbs within an interactive song activity.

Method: Observations of caregivers engaging in song activities with their child were collected. The gestures used during the interactions were coded.

Results: The results show that, when given examples, caregivers provide gestural input both frequently and consistently.

Conclusions: Clinical implications and future directions for exploring songs as an intervention context are discussed.

Purpose: Participant characteristics are underreported; however, they impact swallowing impairments and subsequent access to assessment and intervention. Standards for rigorous and transparent reporting of dysphagia research are required. The Framework for RigOr aNd Transparency In REseaRch on Swallowing (FRONTIERS) offers a critical appraisal tool for dysphagia research. This article outlines questions for participant characteristics in dysphagia research as part of the larger FRONTIERS tool.

Method: An exploratory literature review was conducted to determine how participant characteristics, eligibility criteria, and definitions of health and dysphagia are reported in the literature. Findings were cross-referenced with other relevant critical appraisal tools. A list of questions was generated and refined iteratively with the entire FRONTIERS collaborative until consensus was met.

Results: The participant characteristics portion of the FRONTIERS tool includes eight questions and 16 possible subquestions. Examples for how the tool might be used, as well as rationales for inclusion of all questions, are included.

Conclusions: Including detailed characteristics of research participants may support understanding of how best to serve marginalized and underrepresented populations more effectively. Critical appraisal tools, such as FRONTIERS, may help to improve the rigor and transparency in dysphagia research, ultimately improving patient care.

Purpose: The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between the perceptual measure of speech naturalness and objective measures of pitch, loudness, and rate control as a potential tool for assessment of ataxic dysarthria.

Method: Twenty-seven participants with ataxia and 29 age- and sex-matched control participants completed the pitch glide and loudness step tasks drawn from the Frenchay Dysarthria Assessment-Second Edition (FDA-2) in addition to speech diadochokinetic (DDK) tasks. First, group differences were compared for pitch variability in the pitch glide task, loudness variability in the loudness step task, and syllable duration and speech rate in the DDK task. Then, these acoustic measures were compared with previously collected ratings of speech naturalness by speech-language pathology graduate students.

Results: Robust group differences were measured for pitch variability and both DDK syllable duration and speech rate, indicating that the ataxia group had greater pitch variability, longer DDK syllable duration, and slower DDK speech rate than the control group. No group differences were measured for loudness variability. There were robust relationships between speech naturalness and pitch variability, DDK syllable duration, and DDK speech rate, but not for loudness variability.

Conclusions: Objective acoustic measures of pitch variability in the FDA-2 pitch glide task and syllable duration and speech rate in the DDK task can be used to validate perceptual measures of speech naturalness. Overall, speech-language pathologists can incorporate both perceptual measures of speech naturalness and acoustic measures of pitch variability and DDK performance for a comprehensive evaluation of ataxic dysarthria.