Choosing a Treatment Procedure for Early Stuttering

1992 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 983-993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Onslow
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Early Intervention ◽  
Treatment Procedure ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Response Contingent ◽  
Theoretical Reasoning ◽  
Treatment Procedures ◽  
Intervention Procedure ◽  
Contingent Stimulation

The new responsibility of speech-language pathologists to provide direct, early intervention for stuttering creates a further responsibility for them to choose justifiable treatment procedures for that intervention. This paper has two purposes. The first is to encourage clinicians to evaluate the conceptual and practical aspects of the treatments they use for early stuttering. The second purpose of the paper is to overview available early intervention procedures and consider the advantages, disadvantages, and prominent issues associated with each. The procedures considered are environment manipulation, prolonged speech, and response-contingent stimulation. It is concluded that clinicians have no cause to be satisfied with any currently available early intervention procedure. Further, it is concluded that (a) although anticipatory struggle theories have made a useful contribution to scholarship, their line of theoretical reasoning is questionable for clinical practice; (b) although theoretically sound for the purpose, variants of prolonged speech pose prohibitive conceptual and practical shortcomings if they are used to treat very young stuttering children; (c) despite its disadvantages, response contingent stimulation is the most conceptually and practically justifiable method for early intervention with stuttering.

What Does Evidence-Based Practice Mean to You? A Follow-Up Study Examining School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists' Perspectives on Evidence-Based Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 688-704
Author(s):  
Katrina Fulcher-Rood ◽  
Anny Castilla-Earls ◽  
Jeff Higginbotham
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
School Based ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Ebp Implementation

Purpose The current investigation is a follow-up from a previous study examining child language diagnostic decision making in school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs). The purpose of this study was to examine the SLPs' perspectives regarding the use of evidence-based practice (EBP) in their clinical work. Method Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 25 school-based SLPs who previously participated in an earlier study by Fulcher-Rood et al. 2018). SLPs were asked questions regarding their definition of EBP, the value of research evidence, contexts in which they implement scientific literature in clinical practice, and the barriers to implementing EBP. Results SLPs' definitions of EBP differed from current definitions, in that SLPs only included the use of research findings. SLPs seem to discuss EBP as it relates to treatment and not assessment. Reported barriers to EBP implementation were insufficient time, limited funding, and restrictions from their employment setting. SLPs found it difficult to translate research findings to clinical practice. SLPs implemented external research evidence when they did not have enough clinical expertise regarding a specific client or when they needed scientific evidence to support a strategy they used. Conclusions SLPs appear to use EBP for specific reasons and not for every clinical decision they make. In addition, SLPs rely on EBP for treatment decisions and not for assessment decisions. Educational systems potentially present other challenges that need to be considered for EBP implementation. Considerations for implementation science and the research-to-practice gap are discussed.

Issues in Language Sample Collection and Analysis With Children Using AAC

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 65-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gail Van Tatenhove
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Expressive Language ◽  
Sample Analysis ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Language Sample Analysis ◽  
Language Sample

Language sample analysis is considered one of the best methods of evaluating expressive language production in speaking children. However, the practice of language sample collection and analysis is complicated for speech-language pathologists working with children who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices. This article identifies six issues regarding use of language sample collection and analysis in clinical practice with children who use AAC devices. The purpose of this article is to encourage speech-language pathologists practicing in the area of AAC to utilize language sample collection and analysis as part of ongoing AAC assessment.

scholarly journals Service Delivery to Children With Mild Hearing Loss: Current Practice Patterns and Parent Perceptions

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Walker ◽  
Meredith Spratford ◽  
Sophie E. Ambrose ◽  
Lenore Holte ◽  
Jacob Oleson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Early Intervention ◽  
Service Delivery ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Parent Perceptions ◽  
Parent Perception ◽  
Newborn Hearing ◽  
Mild Hearing Loss

Purpose This study investigates clinical practice patterns and parent perception of intervention for children with mild hearing loss (HL). Method Ages at and delays between service delivery steps (first diagnostic evaluation, confirmation of HL, hearing aid [HA] fitting, entry into early intervention) were investigated for 113 children with mild HL. Comparisons were made to children with moderate-to-severe HL. Parents of children with mild HL reported reasons for delays and their perceptions of intervention and amplification for their children. Results Seventy-four percent of children with mild HL were identified through the newborn hearing screen; 26% were identified later due to passing or not receiving a newborn hearing screen. Ninety-four percent of children with mild HL were fit with HAs, albeit at significantly later ages than children with moderate-to-severe HL. Most parents indicated that their children benefited from HA use, but some parents expressed ambivalence toward the amount of benefit. Conclusions Audiologists appear to be moving toward regularly providing amplification for children with mild HL. However, delays in HA fittings indicate that further educating professionals and parents about the benefits of early amplification and intervention is warranted to encourage timely fitting and consistent use of HAs.

Direct Early Intervention with Stuttering

1990 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Onslow ◽  
Leanne Costa ◽  
Stephen Rue
Keyword(s):  
Early Intervention ◽  
Preliminary Data ◽  
Intervention Programs ◽  
Treatment Programs ◽  
Adult Treatment ◽  
Pretreatment Period ◽  
Posttreatment Period ◽  
Older Subjects ◽  
Verbal Stimulation ◽  
Intervention Procedure

Many clinicians recognize a need for direct intervention with cases of early stuttering. However, this recognition is not supported by adequate empirical information about how such cases should be managed. One possibility is that early stuttering might be controllable by parent-administered, operant, verbal stimulation procedures. The purpose of this paper is to present preliminary data that depict the results of such an intervention procedure with four cases of early stuttering. Speech measures were gathered in a variety of speaking situations, within and beyond the clinic, over a 2-month pretreatment period and a 9-month posttreatment period. Results showed that the 4 subjects achieved reductions in stuttering comparable to those reported for adult treatment programs. However, the present results were obtained in far fewer clinical hours than normally needed in the treatment for older subjects. The treatment times in the present study also compare favorably to those published in other reports of operant intervention procedures with children. These findings suggest that cases of early stuttering might be managed effectively by parents, with limited expenditure of clinical time. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the development of early intervention programs that are more efficient and effective than existing intervention procedures for older clients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document