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 approache...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research Vol. 65; no. 2; pp. 469 - 487
Autores principales: Alighieri, Cassandra, Bettens, Kim, Bruneel, Laura, Perry, Jamie, Hens, Greet, Van Lierde, Kristiane
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Feb2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=155157484&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 155157484
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        10924388
        1SM
      jtl: Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research
      issn: 10924388
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Feb2022
      vid: 65
      iid: 2
      pid: 42
      pub: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
    artinfo:
      ui:
        155157484
        10.1044/2021_JSLHR-21-00405
      ppf: 469
      ppct: 18
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 819KB
      tig:
        atl: One Size Doesn’t Fit All: A Pilot Study Toward Performance-Specific Speech Intervention in Children With a Cleft (Lip and) Palate.
      aug:
        au:
          Alighieri, Cassandra
          Bettens, Kim
          Bruneel, Laura
          Perry, Jamie
          Hens, Greet
          Van Lierde, Kristiane
        affil:
          Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium.
          Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.
          Department of Neurosciences, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
      su:
        Task performance
        Phonetics
        Quality of life
        Speech perception
        Cleft lip
        Cleft palate
        Speech therapy
        Intelligibility of speech
      sug:
        subj:
          Task performance
          Phonetics
          Quality of life
          Speech perception
          Cleft lip
          Cleft palate
          Speech therapy
          Intelligibility of speech
      ab: 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 motorphonetic 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 (Mage = 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 motorphonetic 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.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N