Thai Speech Parameters for Patients with Cleft Palate in a Universal Reporting System

Abstract Speech characteristics in patients with cleft palate have typical patterns that include delayed speech and language development, articulation deficits, resonance disorders, voice disorders, and poor intelligibility. There need to be a reporting system developed as a standardized routine protocol that would be a more consistent reporting system and a means to compare speech outcomes across centers, languages, and within languages in order to make valid comparisons. Aim: To establish Thai speech parameters for patients with cleft palate in a universal reporting system. Methods: To develop a Thai universal parameters for speech outcomes based on speech sampling guidelines for universal parameters for reporting speech outcomes in individuals with cleft palate, four speech/language pathologists (SLPs) who had had experience working with individuals with cleft palate had consensus and established the first draft. Then, the speech parameter group submitted comments and suggestions on their first version. The speech samples were pictures drawn and presented to determine the validity of the two groups of 20 patients with cleft palate. This population was drawn from speech camps and 10 children without a cleft palate for content and face validity as suggested by the SLP raters. The final version was based on data from 16 children who had cleft palates and were enrolled in the project from the speech camp and community-based speech therapy model for children with cleft lip and palate and from a project of 5-year outcome of children with cleft palate and the Center for Cleft/Lip and Palate and Craniofacial Deformities, and Khon Kaen University, in association with the Tawanchai Project. Results: The final set of Thai speech parameters was composed of seven typical speech characteristics of individuals with cleft palate. The percentage of agreement ranged from 43.75 to 100. Thirty percent of the proportion of positives ranged from 0.70 to 1. Thirteen percent of proportion of negatives ranged from 0.70 to 1. Conclusion: This test might be recommended as the universal standard as a methodological approach when reporting audits and research outcomes. The SLP raters further recommended that there be ongoing training programs in listening skills for specialists for judging these types of outcomes.