A Randomized Controlled Trial for Children With Childhood Apraxia of Speech Comparing Rapid Syllable Transition Treatment and the Nuffield Dyspraxia Programme–Third Edition

PurposeThis randomized controlled trial compared the experimental Rapid Syllable Transition (ReST) treatment to the Nuffield Dyspraxia Programme–Third Edition (NDP3; Williams & Stephens, 2004), used widely in clinical practice in Australia and the United Kingdom. Both programs aim to improve speech motor planning/programming for children with apraxia of speech (CAS), but they differ in types of stimuli used, level of stimulus complexity at initiation of treatment, and the principles of motor learning that they apply.MethodTreatment was delivered to 26 children with mild to severe CAS aged 4–12 years through trained and supervised speech-language pathology students in 1-hr sessions, 4 days a week for 3 weeks at a university clinic. Articulation and prosodic accuracy were assessed at pretreatment, 1 week, 1 month, and 4 months posttreatment using blinded independent assessors to compare treatment, maintenance, and generalization effects.ResultsThe ReST and NDP3 treatments demonstrated large treatment effects. ReST maintained treatment gains from 1-week to 4-months posttreatment more effectively than the NDP3. Significant generalization to untreated stimuli was observed for both ReST and NDP3.ConclusionsReST and NDP3 have strong evidence of treatment and generalization gains in children with CAS when delivered intensively. Overall, ReST has greater external evidence from multiple sources but both treatments have support for clinical use.

Download Full-text

Vestibular therapy improved motor planning, attention, and balance in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorders: a randomized controlled trial

Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research ◽

10.15761/pmrr.1000171 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Hojjat Haghgoo

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Attention Deficit ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Motor Planning ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders ◽

Hyperactivity Disorders

Download Full-text

Treatment Fidelity Procedures for an Aphasia Intervention Within a Randomized Controlled Trial: Design, Feasibility, and Results

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2019_ajslp-cac48-18-0227 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (1S) ◽

pp. 412-424

Author(s):

Elissa L. Conlon ◽

Emily J. Braun ◽

Edna M. Babbitt ◽

Leora R. Cherney

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Treatment Protocol ◽

Treatment Fidelity ◽

Protocol Adherence ◽

Study Condition ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Aphasia Therapy ◽

Percent Accuracy ◽

Over Time

Purpose This study reports on the treatment fidelity procedures implemented during a 5-year randomized controlled trial comparing intensive and distributed comprehensive aphasia therapy. Specifically, the results of 1 treatment, verb network strengthening treatment (VNeST), are examined. Method Eight participants were recruited for each of 7 consecutive cohorts for a total of 56 participants. Participants completed 60 hr of aphasia therapy, including 15 hr of VNeST. Two experienced speech-language pathologists delivered the treatment. To promote treatment fidelity, the study team developed a detailed manual of procedures and fidelity checklists, completed role plays to standardize treatment administration, and video-recorded all treatment sessions for review. To assess protocol adherence during treatment delivery, trained research assistants not involved in the treatment reviewed video recordings of a subset of randomly selected VNeST treatment sessions and completed the fidelity checklists. This process was completed for 32 participants representing 2 early cohorts and 2 later cohorts, which allowed for measurement of protocol adherence over time. Percent accuracy of protocol adherence was calculated across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition (intensive vs. distributed therapy). Results The fidelity procedures were sufficient to promote and verify a high level of adherence to the treatment protocol across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition. Conclusion Treatment fidelity strategies and monitoring are feasible when incorporated into the study design. Treatment fidelity monitoring should be completed at regular intervals during the course of a study to ensure that high levels of protocol adherence are maintained over time and across conditions.

Download Full-text

Phonomotor Versus Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Anomia in 58 Persons With Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research ◽

10.1044/2019_jslhr-l-18-0257 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 62 (12) ◽

pp. 4464-4482 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Diane L. Kendall ◽

Megan Oelke Moldestad ◽

Wesley Allen ◽

Janaki Torrence ◽

Stephen E. Nadeau

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Response Latency ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Semantic Knowledge ◽

Semantic Feature ◽

Feature Analysis ◽

Group Differences ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Confrontation Naming ◽

Semantic Feature Analysis

Purpose The ultimate goal of anomia treatment should be to achieve gains in exemplars trained in the therapy session, as well as generalization to untrained exemplars and contexts. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of phonomotor treatment, a treatment focusing on enhancement of phonological sequence knowledge, against semantic feature analysis (SFA), a lexical-semantic therapy that focuses on enhancement of semantic knowledge and is well known and commonly used to treat anomia in aphasia. Method In a between-groups randomized controlled trial, 58 persons with aphasia characterized by anomia and phonological dysfunction were randomized to receive 56–60 hr of intensively delivered treatment over 6 weeks with testing pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3 months posttreatment termination. Results There was no significant between-groups difference on the primary outcome measure (untrained nouns phonologically and semantically unrelated to each treatment) at 3 months posttreatment. Significant within-group immediately posttreatment acquisition effects for confrontation naming and response latency were observed for both groups. Treatment-specific generalization effects for confrontation naming were observed for both groups immediately and 3 months posttreatment; a significant decrease in response latency was observed at both time points for the SFA group only. Finally, significant within-group differences on the Comprehensive Aphasia Test–Disability Questionnaire ( Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2004 ) were observed both immediately and 3 months posttreatment for the SFA group, and significant within-group differences on the Functional Outcome Questionnaire ( Glueckauf et al., 2003 ) were found for both treatment groups 3 months posttreatment. Discussion Our results are consistent with those of prior studies that have shown that SFA treatment and phonomotor treatment generalize to untrained words that share features (semantic or phonological sequence, respectively) with the training set. However, they show that there is no significant generalization to untrained words that do not share semantic features or phonological sequence features.

Download Full-text

A Phonomotor Approach to Apraxia of Speech Treatment

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2020_ajslp-19-00116 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (4) ◽

pp. 2109-2130

Author(s):

Lauren Bislick

Keyword(s):

Phase I ◽

Treatment Effects ◽

Single Case ◽

Motor Planning ◽

The Other ◽

Multimodal Approach ◽

Apraxia Of Speech ◽

Duration Of Treatment ◽

Treatment Gains ◽

Future Work

Purpose This study continued Phase I investigation of a modified Phonomotor Treatment (PMT) Program on motor planning in two individuals with apraxia of speech (AOS) and aphasia and, with support from prior work, refined Phase I methodology for treatment intensity and duration, a measure of communicative participation, and the use of effect size benchmarks specific to AOS. Method A single-case experimental design with multiple baselines across behaviors and participants was used to examine acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of treatment effects 8–10 weeks posttreatment. Treatment was distributed 3 days a week, and duration of treatment was specific to each participant (criterion based). Experimental stimuli consisted of target sounds or clusters embedded nonwords and real words, specific to each participants' deficit. Results Findings show improved repetition accuracy for targets in trained nonwords, generalization to targets in untrained nonwords and real words, and maintenance of treatment effects at 10 weeks posttreatment for one participant and more variable outcomes for the other participant. Conclusions Results indicate that a modified version of PMT can promote generalization and maintenance of treatment gains for trained speech targets via a multimodal approach emphasizing repeated exposure and practice. While these results are promising, the frequent co-occurrence of AOS and aphasia warrants a treatment that addresses both motor planning and linguistic deficits. Thus, the application of traditional PMT with participant-specific modifications for AOS embedded into the treatment program may be a more effective approach. Future work will continue to examine and maximize improvements in motor planning, while also treating anomia in aphasia.

Download Full-text