Search

Background: Spoken discourse impairments post‐traumatic brain injury (TBI) are well‐documented and heterogeneous in nature. These impairments have chronic implications for adults in terms of employment, socializing and community involvement. Intervention delivered by a speech–language pathologist (SLP) is recommended for adults with discourse impairments post‐TBI, with an emphasis on context‐sensitive treatment. The developing evidence base indicates a wide array of treatment components for SLPs to evaluate and implement within their clinical practice. However, there is limited insight into how SLPs are currently treating discourse impairments and the rationales informing clinical practice. Aims: To explore the under‐researched area of clinical practice for spoken discourse interventions with adults post‐TBI, including treatment components and clinician rationales, and to contribute towards a shared knowledge base. Methods & Procedures: Participants were recruited via purposeful sampling strategies. Six SLPs participated from Australia, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US). Semi‐structured interviews were conducted via Zoom. Interviews were manually transcribed, coded and analysed via a qualitative content analysis approach. Outcomes & Results: :Participants described discourse treatment practices across various settings and TBI recovery stages. Results indicated that SLPs used numerous treatment activities, resources and outcome measures. Intervention approaches primarily targeted social communication skills, strategy development/utilization and insight‐building. Clinical practice conformed to available guidelines where possible, reflected best practice and incorporated components of the research literature. Participants reported using individualized treatment activities aimed at addressing client‐specific factors and rationales prioritized tailored, context‐sensitive and goal‐directed treatment. Conclusions & Implications: This study provided insight into a previously under‐researched area. It highlighted a wide range of treatment activities and factors informing current SLPs' treatment of spoken discourse impairment post‐TBI. Overall, clinical practice and rationales discussed in this study were aligned with best practice and emphasized a contextualized, individualized approach to discourse treatment across service settings and stages of recovery. Participants identified areas requiring further support, including access to training, resources and research, and the challenge of finding suitable outcome measures. Further investigation into discourse management post‐TBI, from initial assessment to outcome measurement, may help inform clinical decision‐making and the transfer of research to practice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Spoken discourse impairments occur in dialogic and monologic productions post‐TBI. Interventions targeting both genres are detailed within the research literature; however, studies exploring clinical practice and decision‐making for discourse interventions post‐TBI are limited. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study provides new insight into the current treatment targets, activities, resources and outcome measures employed by clinicians supporting adults with discourse impairment post‐TBI. It details the factors that influence clinical decision‐making for this caseload and identifies an emphasis on client priorities and the value of clinician experience. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This study identifies the broad and complex considerations required to deliver context‐sensitive discourse intervention post‐TBI. It indicates the need for an in‐depth review from assessment to treatment outcomes to better understand and support this area of practice and to direct future research. This study also highlighted the role of clinician experience in discourse intervention and the value of sharing clinical knowledge and resources within and across the profession to support all levels of clinician experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Impaired discourse production is commonly reported for individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Discourse deficits can negatively impact community integration, return to employment and quality of life. COVID‐19 restrictions have reduced in‐person assessment services for people with communication impairments. Advances in telehealth may help speech and language therapists (SLTs) to assess monologic discourse more systematically and improve access to services for patients who may find it difficult to attend in‐person. Aims: To examine the feasibility of telehealth administration of narrative and procedural discourse tasks with individuals with TBI and matched controls. Methods & Procedures: A total of 20 individuals with TBI and 20 healthy controls, aged 18–55 years, were directly recruited from the UK and indirectly recruited from the US. For participants with TBI, time post‐injury was at least 3 months with no diagnosis of aphasia. Control participants were matched for sex and as closely as possible for age. Feasibility of measures was based upon the time to administer both narrative tasks, the report of any technological problems, and participant feed. Discourse samples were transcribed verbatim and analysed using story grammar analysis (for narrative discourse) and identification of propositions (for procedural discourse). Interrater reliability was calculated using percentage agreement for 50% of the data. Non‐parametric analyses were used to analyse the performance of the two groups. Outcomes & Results: Narrative and procedural discourse samples were collected via telehealth in approximately 10 min with no reported technical difficulties or complaints from any participants. For narrative discourse performance, there were significant differences for the TBI and control groups for measures of complete episodes (p < 0.001) and missing episodes (p = 0.005). No significant group differences were noted for any of the procedural discourse measures. Conclusions & Implications: Results support the feasibility of collecting discourse samples via telehealth. Although the participants' discourse performance distinguished the TBI and control groups on the narrative task, no differences between the groups were noted for the procedural task. The narrative discourse task may have been more difficult than the procedural task, or video cue support reduced the cognitive load of the procedural task. This finding suggests the use of more complex procedural tasks without video cue support may be needed. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Although little research has explored the feasibility of administering discourse assessments for individuals with TBI via telehealth, some studies have found that discourse interventions can be feasibly administered via telehealth. It is also well established that individuals with TBI struggle with the supra‐structural and macro‐linguistic elements of discourse production. Both procedural and narrative discourse tasks have been found to differentiate individuals with TBI from healthy controls. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Few studies have investigated the feasibility of, and procedures for, administering discourse tasks via telehealth. Additionally, the inclusion of multiple types of discourse tasks to parse cognitive–communication abilities is lacking in the current literature. Findings from this study support that narrative and procedural discourse can be feasibly sampled via telehealth and that international collaboration for research on this topic can facilitate such studies. Individuals with TBI performed more poorly on three measures of narrative discourse. No differences between groups were identified for the procedural task. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Telehealth assessment for discourse provides flexibility for both the individual with TBI and the speech–language therapist and does not compromise the quality of data collected. The administration of discourse tasks and collection of data was not time‐consuming and was well accepted by the study participants. Additionally, international research collaboration not only expands potential participation in research but increases the opportunity to recruit and study more diverse groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As delays or disorders in early language and communication are the most prevalent symptom in children with disabilities, early screening is crucial to promote prevention, early diagnosis, and intervention. However, to the best of our knowledge, no screening tool is available for the joint assessment of early language and social communication skills in European Portuguese (EP)‐learning children, which is critical for screening, monitoring and enrolment in appropriate early intervention services. Aims: (1) To adapt and validate the EP version of the Communication and Symbolic Behaviour Scales Developmental Profile™ (CSBS DP™) Infant–Toddler Checklist, a parental report for the screening of early language and social communication skills. (2) To conduct a cross‐cultural comparison between the EP adaptation and the original US version. Methods & Procedures: A total of 611 EP‐learning children (ages 6–24 months) were assessed on the CSBS DP Infant–Toddler Checklist. Normative data, psychometric characteristics (i.e., internal consistency and test–retest reliability), and cross‐cultural comparison between the EP and the original version were explored. Outcomes & Results: Internal consistency ranged from good to excellent and the test–retest reliability was excellent. The performance of the EP and US samples matched on almost all scores. However, EP children performed significantly better than their American peers in the Social compositive at 22 months and in the Symbolic composite at 20 months. No further differences were found. Conclusions & Implications: These findings showed that the EP CSBS DP Infant–Toddler Checklist seems to be a reliable screening tool of communicative and symbolic behaviours for EP‐learning children, which can be particularly relevant for decision‐making in clinical practice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Early communication skills are known to be related to later language outcomes. Thus, screening tools for the early identification of children at risk for language and communication impairments, which may lead to monitoring and early intervention, have the potential to promote better outcomes. However, to the best of our knowledge, no screening tool is available for the assessment of early communication abilities in EP‐learning children. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study adapted and validated the EP CSBS DP Infant–Toddler Checklist, the first published parental report checklist for the assessment of early communication skills in EP. It described the psychometric characteristics of the adapted checklist, summarized the newly available normative data for EP‐learning infants and toddlers, and compared the performance of EP‐learning children with the original standardization sample reported for American English. The results demonstrated that this tool is a reliable instrument for the early screening of language, communicative and symbolic behaviours for EP‐learning children between 6 and 24 months of age. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Given that early screening is crucial to promote prevention, early diagnosis and intervention, the availability of this tool is particularly relevant for children monitoring and their enrolment in appropriate early intervention services, helping decision‐making in clinical practice, in line with current guidelines regarding early monitoring and intervention to promote and support better outcomes. Thus, the tool and related normative data will be useful for paediatricians, family doctors, primary healthcare providers, developmental psychologists and speech–language therapists, among other professionals in the healthcare and educational fields, concerned with speech, language, and communication development and impairments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To identify how speech‐language pathologists (SLPs) in the United States are screening for and identifying dysphagia. To do this, we examined the approaches most often used to screen for dysphagia and the influence of contextual factors such as setting, continuing education and means of staying up to date with the most current literature on screening approaches. Method: A web‐based survey composed of 32 questions was developed and field tested for content, relevance and workflow. The survey was distributed online, via social media, online SLP forums and through the American Speech‐Language‐Hearing Association's Special Interest Group 13 (swallowing disorders). One hundred and thirty‐seven clinicians from the United States completed the survey and were included for analysis using descriptive statistics and linear regression modelling to assess associations of continuing education and years practicing with screening protocols and consumption of evidence. Results: Respondents worked in a variety of settings, including acute care, skilled nursing facilities, and inpatient rehabilitation. Most respondents worked with adult populations (88%). The most common screening protocols reported were a volume‐dependent water swallow test (74%), subjective patient report (66%), and trials of solids/liquids (49%). Twenty‐four percent (24%) reported using a questionnaire, the Eating Assessment Tool (80%) being most common. How clinicians consume their evidence was significantly associated with the types of screening approaches used. Continuing education hours were significantly associated with dysphagia screening protocol choice (p < 0.001) and how clinicians stayed up to date with evidence (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Results from this study provide an in‐depth look at the choices clinicians are making in the field regarding how to effectively screen patients for the presence of dysphagia. Contextual factors such as evidence base consumption patterns should serve researchers to continue seeking alternative ways to share evidence with clinicians, accessibly. Associations between continuing education and protocol choice show the need for continued evidence‐based and high‐quality continuing education opportunities. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: This study provides an in‐depth look at the choices clinicians are making in the field regarding effective dysphagia screening practices. Clinician screening choices are examined with contextual factors such as evidence base consumption patterns and continuing education. This paper increases knowledge of the most used dysphagia screening practices and context for clinicians and researchers to improve use, evidence and dissemination of best practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a large body of research showing the negative impact of a total laryngectomy on the resultant voice signal across multiple outcomes (e.g., speech intelligibility/acceptability, listener comprehension, voice quality). However, there is limited information on the effects of laryngectomy on broader communication acts, particularly in the area of pragmatics, commonly referred to as the social use of language. Considering that individuals with a laryngectomy (IWL) frequently report reduced quality of life as well as reduced communicative competency, expanding the current research to include pragmatics is warranted. Aim: To explore the pragmatic changes in communication experienced by tracheoesophageal speakers. Methods & Procedures: The current study adapted an existing 17‐item measure to assess verbal, non‐verbal, paralinguistic and receptive communication competence via self‐report. This adapted measure was then distributed to 65 tracheoesophageal speakers (52 males, 13 females, mean age = 63.4 ± 8.5 years). Outcomes & Results: Both negative and positive pragmatic changes to communication were reported by participants secondary to laryngectomy. This included changes in verbal (negative –37.5%, positive –15.15%); non‐verbal (negative –9.54%, positive –35.45%; and paralinguistic acts (negative –29.55%, positive –34.09%). Changes to receptive communication were also noted (negative –14.78%, positive –43.19%). Conclusions & Implications: The overall results suggest that communication changes post‐laryngectomy exist well beyond the paralinguistic areas (e.g., intelligibility, voice quality) and that males and females may approach or respond to changes in communication differently. Results are discussed specific to clinical intervention and the importance of including assessment of pragmatic function post‐laryngectomy. WHat this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: While there is a large body of research on the changes to the speaker and listener following laryngectomy, there is minimal information on how the use of alaryngeal speech affects overall communication, specifically in the area of pragmatics or the social use of language. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study used an adapted version of the widely used Pragmatic Protocol to delineate changes in pragmatic components of communication for tracheoesophageal speakers. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Clinically, this information can be used by healthcare professionals to educate and prepare IWL on potential changes in the underrecognized area of pragmatics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Online knowledge translation (KT) approaches are becoming increasingly prevalent within healthcare due to their accessibility and facilitation of international support networks. Online platforms enable timely and far‐reaching dissemination of current evidence and best‐practice recommendations. Although there is potential to improve the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines, it is essential to consider the acceptability of online approaches to healthcare professionals to ensure their successful integration within everyday clinical settings. Aims: To establish the prospective acceptability of a theoretically informed online intervention for speech pathologists, Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice, that aims to facilitate the implementation of aphasia best practice. Methods & Procedures: A mixed‐methods multinational electronic survey based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) completed by aphasia researchers and clinicians. Outcomes & Results: A total of 43 participants completed the survey with 91% (n = 39) indicating that they would use Aphasia Nexus. Understanding the intervention and how it works (intervention coherence as per the TFA) was the key factor influencing the likelihood of integration within everyday clinical practice. Participants identified potential areas where the intervention could influence service change and also recommended further design and content changes to improve the intervention. Conclusions & Implications: Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable platform for further feasibility testing in the form of a pilot trial within an Australian‐based health service. The study progresses the theory of TFA as it was a valuable framework facilitating the identification of prominent factors influencing acceptability. The study also informs further intervention refinements in preparation for the next stage of research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Online strategies have the potential to enhance KT and promote the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines. An online intervention, however, can only be effective if implemented well. For this reason, it is essential to establish the acceptability of online interventions to the intended recipients and therefore increase the likelihood of successful implementation. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study used a theoretically based framework to establish the acceptability of an online implementation intervention, Aphasia Nexus, to multinational aphasia clinicians and researchers. It demonstrated the value in identifying the prominent factors influencing acceptability to inform further intervention refinements and warrant continuing research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Speech pathologists should use online platforms to drive the implementation of best practice on an international scale. It is important for clinicians to have an in‐depth understanding of online interventions and how they work to enhance their successful uptake into routine clinical practice. Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable online platform for implementing best practice in aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The language of the science curriculum is complex, even in the early grades. To communicate their scientific observations, children must produce complex syntax, particularly complement clauses (e.g., I think it will float; We noticed that it vibrates). Complex syntax is often challenging for children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and thus their learning and communication of science may be compromised. Aims: We asked whether recast therapy delivered in the context of a science curriculum led to gains in complement clause use and scientific content knowledge. To understand the efficacy of recast therapy, we compared changes in science and language knowledge in children who received treatment for complement clauses embedded in a first‐grade science curriculum to two active control conditions (vocabulary + science, phonological awareness + science). Methods & Procedures: This 2‐year single‐site three‐arm parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted in Delaware, USA. Children with DLD, not yet in first grade and with low accuracy on complement clauses, were eligible. Thirty‐three 4–7‐year‐old children participated in the summers of 2018 and 2019 (2020 was cancelled due to COVID‐19). We assigned participants to arms using 1:1:1 pseudo‐random allocation (avoiding placing siblings together). The intervention consisted of 39 small‐group sessions of recast therapy, robust vocabulary instruction or phonological awareness intervention during eight science units over 4 weeks, followed by two science units (1 week) taught without language intervention. Pre‐/post‐measures were collected 3 weeks before and after camp by unmasked assessors. Outcomes & Results: Primary outcome measures were accuracy on a 20‐item probe of complement clause production and performance on ten 10‐item unit tests (eight science + language, two science only). Complete data were available for 31 children (10 grammar, 21 active control); two others were lost to follow‐up. Both groups made similar gains on science unit tests for science + language content (pre versus post, d = 2.9, p < 0.0001; group, p = 0.24). The grammar group performed significantly better at post‐test than the active control group (d = 2.5, p = 0.049) on complement clause probes and marginally better on science‐only unit tests (d = 2.5, p = 0.051). Conclusions & Implications: Children with DLD can benefit from language intervention embedded in curricular content and learn both language and science targets taught simultaneously. Tentative findings suggest that treatment for grammar targets may improve academic outcomes. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: We know that recast therapy focused on morphology is effective but very time consuming. Treatment for complex syntax in young children has preliminary efficacy data available. Prior research provides mixed evidence as to children's ability to learn language targets in conjunction with other information. What this study adds: This study provides additional data supporting the efficacy of intensive complex syntax recast therapy for children ages 4–7 with Developmental Language Disorder. It also provides data that children can learn language targets and science curricular content simultaneously. What are the clinical implications of this work?: As SLPs, we have to talk about something to deliver language therapy; we should consider talking about curricular content. Recast therapy focused on syntactic frames is effective with young children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is an increasing number of technological resources available to speech and language therapists (SLTs) for use in clinical practice, but the factors that influence SLTs' selection and use of such resources are not well understood. In related fields, technology acceptance models have been employed to explain users' adoption of technology and to inform the advancement of empirically supported technological resources. Aims: To determine the factors that influence SLTs' use of technology for clinical practice by testing a model of their technology acceptance and use. Methods & Procedures: We surveyed 209 practising SLTs in the United States representative of the speech and language membership of the American Speech–Language–Hearing Association (ASHA). Participants completed a 38‐item electronic survey representing four categories: (1) technology use, (2) technology attitudes and factors influencing technology use, (3) employment information and (4) demographics. Items measuring technology attitudes served as indicators of the research model, which mapped the primary relationships of a technology acceptance model. Survey data were collected before the Covid‐19 pandemic. Outcomes & Results: The research model accounted for 66% of the variance in SLTs' behavioural intention to use technology, which significantly and positively predicted the amount of time they reportedly spent using technology in the workplace. Subjective norms and attitudes towards technology use directly predicted the intention to use technology. Perceived usefulness and ease of use indirectly predicted intention to use technology. Survey respondents reported using technology during 48% (SD = 24%) of their overall weekly work hours on average, with a large majority reporting using technology at least once per week for planning (89% of respondents), assessment (66% of respondents) or intervention (90% of respondents). Conclusions & Implications: These findings statistically explain the relationships between SLTs' attitudes and their intention to use technology for clinical practice, contributing to our understanding of why SLTs adopt certain technologies. We also detail the nature and frequency of technology use in the clinical practice of SLTs. Future directions for this work include further exploring use categories, employing direct measurements of technology use and exploring the impact of recent changes in SLT service delivery due to the Covid‐19 pandemic on SLTs' technology attitudes. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectExisting research about the adoption and use of technological resources by SLTs indicates that they select tools based on convenience, cost and recommendations by others.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study is the first to develop and test a research model of SLTs' technology attitudes. The findings from model testing demonstrate the significant predictors of SLTs' behavioural intention to use technology for clinical purposes. Intent of use is related to how much SLTs use technology in the workplace.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?The present findings can inform interventions targeting the design and adoption of electronic SLT resources that are empirically supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The involvement of speech and language therapists (SLTs) within paediatric palliative care (PPC) settings has been recognized within the extant literature. However, there is little understanding of SLT's specific roles and practices when working with this vulnerable cohort of children and their families. As part of a larger body of work to develop consensus‐based recommendations for SLTs working in PPC, it is important to investigate demographic and caseload characteristics. Aims: This exploratory study aimed to gather previously undocumented international demographic data pertaining to SLT service provision, caseload and training in PPC. Additionally, it sought to ascertain the current treatment and assessment approaches of SLTs, and if variations exist in beliefs and practices. Methods & Procedures: An anonymous cross‐sectional survey was designed and reported according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E‐Surveys (CHERRIES). The online survey consisted of 40 items spanning four domains: (1) demographic information, (2) caseload information, (3) service provision and (4) training and education. SLTs from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, Ireland and the United States were recruited using a purposive snowball sampling approach. Descriptive analysis of closed‐ended survey responses and content analysis of open‐ended responses are presented. Outcomes & Results: A total of 52 respondents completed the survey. SLTs worked in a variety of PPC settings, with patients of varying age and disease groups. Over 50% of participants reported working in PPC for ≤ 4 years. Genetic disorders (34%), oncology (27%) and neurological conditions (21%) made up a significant portion of respondents' caseloads. Reported treatments and assessment approaches used by SLTs are not unique to a PPC population. Barriers and enablers for practice were identified. A portion of participants did not feel trained and prepared to assess (19.2%) or treat (15.4%) PPC clients. Conclusions & Implications: This study confirms that SLTs internationally have a role in the management of communication and swallowing impairments in a PPC context. However, whether current training and resources adequately support SLTs in this role remains questionable. This paper helps to provide SLTs, administrators, professional associations and tertiary institutions with foundational data to help inform workforce planning, advocacy efforts and training priorities. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectThe published multidisciplinary literature has identified that SLTs have a role in PPC. However, there has been no targeted research investigating the professional characteristics of clinicians in this context, nor any detailed information regarding associated clinician beliefs or management approaches.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study is a snapshot of attributes, practice patterns and beliefs of SLTs who work with a PPC population. It highlights SLT perspectives of education and training, as well as meta‐perceptions of themselves within the multidisciplinary team.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Data presented in this paper will help to enable SLTs, organizations and associations to augment service provision and determine future professional development priorities within the field of PPC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is extremely limited population‐based research on social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SCD). Population‐based samples have the potential to better characterize the SCD phenotype by mitigating confounds and biases that are typical of convenience and clinical samples. Aims: The aims of this preliminary epidemiologic study were to advance our understanding of the SCD phenotype relative to developmental language disorder (DLD), obtain an estimate of prevalence, identify risk factors and lay the groundwork for future population level research of SCD. Methods & Procedures: We analysed existing data from the EpiSLI Database to examine social communication skills in 393 8th grade (13–14 years) children with and without a history of DLD. The primary measure used to evaluate SCD was the Children's Communication Checklist (CCC‐2). Two case definitions of SCD reflecting DSM‐5 criteria were examined. Both definitions involved significant pragmatic impairment, employing a commonly adopted clinical cut‐point of 1.5 SD. In one case, pragmatic deficits could occur along with structural language deficits and, in the other case (established using principal component analysis), pragmatic and social skills were disproportionately lower than structural language abilities. Outcomes & Results: When using the first case definition, SCD was much more common in children with a history of DLD than without DLD and history of language disorder at kindergarten was a significant risk factor for SCD in adolescence. However, it is important to note that SCD could be found in children with no prior deficits in other aspects of language. When the second definition was employed, SCD was equally distributed across children with and without a history of DLD. Male sex was a significant risk factor using this case definition of SCD. The estimated prevalence of SCD ranged from 7% (SE = 1.5%) to 11% (SE = 1.7%), acknowledging that prevalence depends on the cut‐point selected to determine communication disorder. Conclusions & Implications: These findings contribute to our understanding of the association between SCD and DLD by recognizing varying profiles of pragmatic and social communication difficulties, which in turn may help refine our diagnostic categories. Preliminary prevalence estimates of SCD can serve as an initial guidepost for identification and planning for intervention services for this condition. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: There is considerable debate about the diagnostic category of SCD and its relation to other neurodevelopmental disorders. What this study adds to existing knowledge: Using data from a US‐based epidemiologic sample of DLD, this study offers new information about the association between SCD and DLD, provides preliminary estimates of SCD prevalence, and identifies risk factors for SCD. Clinical implications of this study: Improved understanding of possible profiles of pragmatic and social communication deficits will help to clarify diagnostic categories and preliminary prevalence estimates may assist with ensuring availability of adequate intervention services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Similar positive results (e.g. immediate decreases in stuttering frequency and a 60–80% recovery rate from stuttering) have been reported for numerous therapeutic protocols for treating childhood stuttering, many of which have been diametrically opposite in their orientations and implementations. For example, Johnson advocated indirect treatments that simply advocated refraining from drawing any negative attention to childhood disfluencies as persistent and chronic stuttering was thought to progress via negative parental reactions to normal disfluencies. In contrast, direct interventionists sought immediately to eliminate stuttered speech patterns by training ‘corrected’ speech models that usually involved some form of prolonged speech. However, reports from speech and language therapists around North Carolina, USA, suggest much lower recovery rates in the children they treat (i.e. 13.9% over a median therapeutic period of 3 years, which to the present authors is an indicator of therapeutic inefficiency and ineffectiveness). Aims: The discrepancy between these recovery rates calls for a re-examination of the efficacy of stuttering therapy for children, especially in light of recent statements from some therapies suggesting that therapy might be curative in nature. Main contribution: Spontaneous and complete recovery (removing all overt and covert markers of the pathology) occurs in 60–80% of all children who display incipient stuttering behaviours. As such, it appears that many claims of therapeutic success in children who stutter are confounded by the possibility of spontaneous recovery during the testing and intervention period. Simply put, it is impossible to discriminate between recovery that would occur naturally over time, and what may have been simply accelerated via therapy. Based on stable prevalence rates and the data in the present paper, it is suggested that therapy does little to boost recovery rates from incipient stuttering. Therapy can provide ‘inhibitory’ symptomatic relief with varying degrees of success with respect to decreasing stuttering severity and the need for continued therapy. However, it must be made clear that curing stuttering is not a likely outcome of therapy, although successful management can decrease the severity of the problem. It is argued that all forms of stuttering inhibition, including those at work during spontaneous recovery, are all mediated by the degree of mirror neuron engagement in the brain. Conclusions: It is proposed that in children who stutter, the best source of relief from stuttering is in the effective and efficient engagement of mirror neurons via methods that best replicate choral speech. In order to induce natural sounding, fluent speech, it is suggested that one uses primarily derivations of choral speech such as altered auditory feedback. Motoric techniques might also be used synergistically to provide supplementary sources of mirror neuron engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]