Search

Purpose: Rehabilitation intervention descriptions often do not explicitly identify active ingredients or how those ingredients lead to changes in patient functioning. The Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) provides guidance to identify the critical aspects of any rehabilitation therapy and supported the development of standardly named ingredients and targets in voice therapy (Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System for Voice Therapy [RTSS-Voice]). This study sought to test the content validity of the RTSS-Voice and determine if the RTSS-Voice can be used to identify commonalities and differences in treatment (criterion validity) across clinicians in everyday clinical practice., Method: Five speech-language pathologists from different institutions videotaped one therapy session for 59 patients diagnosed with a voice or upper airway disorder. Specifications were created for each video, and iterative rounds of revisions were completed with the treating clinician and two RTSS experts until consensus was reached on each specification., Results: All 59 sessions were specified without the addition of any targets or ingredients. There were two frequent targets: (a) increased volition and (b) decreased strained voice quality. There were three frequent ingredients: (a) information regarding the patient's capability and motivation to perform a therapeutic behavior, (b) knowledge of results feedback, and (c) opportunities to practice voicing with improved resonance and mean airflow. Across sessions treating vocal hyperfunction, there was large variability across clinicians regarding the types and number of treatment components introduced, types of feedback provided, and vocal practice within spontaneous speech and negative practice., Conclusions: The RTSS and the RTSS-Voice demonstrated strong content validity, as they comprehensively characterized 59 therapy sessions. They also demonstrated strong criterion validity, as commonalities and differences were identified in everyday voice therapy for vocal hyperfunction across multiple clinicians. Future work to translate RTSS principles and RTSS-Voice terms into clinical documentation can help to understand how clinician and patient variability impacts outcomes and bridge the research-practice gap., Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24796875.

Purpose: This study sought to investigate whether a significant difference exists in attendance, cancellations, and no-shows between in-person therapy and telepractice. The authors hypothesized that telepractice no-show and cancellation rates would be less than in-person no-show and cancellation rates., Method: This retrospective study manually reviewed and analyzed attendance, no-show, and cancellation data over a 3-month span of in-person-only visits (September 2019-November 2019) and a 3-month span of telepractice visits (September 2020-November 2020) conducted at the Emory Voice Center, a tertiary care practice in urban Atlanta, Georgia. Additionally, data were collected for each patient's full course of therapy outside of the 3-month windows and analyzed for attendance, no-show, and cancellation patterns., Results: Data from 521 patients were available for review from the selected time frame. In 2019 (in-person), 157 patients met inclusion criteria, and in 2020 (telepractice), 176 patients were included. Therapy initiation, therapy attendance, and no-show rates had significant increases in the telepractice year, and cancellations made greater than 24 hr before the appointments had a significant decrease in the telepractice year. Furthermore, the overall course of therapy showed significantly fewer missed appointments and more attended appointments in the telepractice year., Conclusions: Patients participating in voice therapy via telepractice are more likely to initiate treatment and attend treatment and less likely to cancel sessions compared with patients receiving treatment in person. These data combined with extant data on telepractice treatment efficacy indicate that telepractice should be considered standard of care and offered to all patients seeking treatment, as it removes many reported barriers to treatment.

Purpose Clinical trials have demonstrated that standardized voice treatment programs are effective for some patients, but identifying the unique individual treatment ingredients specifically responsible for observed improvements remains elusive. To address this problem, the authors used a taxonomy of voice therapy, the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS), and a Delphi process to develop the RTSS-Voice (expert consensus categories of measurable and unique voice treatment ingredients and targets). Method Initial targets and ingredients were derived from a taxonomy of voice therapy. Through six Delphi Rounds, 10 vocal rehabilitation experts rated the measurability and uniqueness of individual treatment targets and ingredients. After each round, revisions (guided by the experts' feedback) were finalized among a primary reader (a voice therapy expert) and two external readers (rehabilitation experts outside the field of voice). Consensus was established when the label and definition of an ingredient or target reached a supramajority threshold (≥ 8 of 10 expert agreement). Results Thirty-five target and 19 ingredient categories were agreed to be measurable, unique, and accurate reflections of the rules and terminology of the RTSS. Operational definitions for each category included differences in the way ingredients are delivered and the way individual targets are modified by those ingredients. Conclusions The consensus labels and operationalized ingredients and targets making up the RTSS-Voice have potential to improve voice therapy research, practice, and education/training. The methods used to develop these lists may be useful for other speech, language, and hearing treatment specifications. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.15243357.