Search

People with communication disorders face barriers to accessing safe and respectful healthcare. These barriers result in increased healthcare complications and inefficiencies, both of which contribute to increased healthcare costs. One obstacle to advocating for accommodations that could improve healthcare for this population is the absence of cost effectiveness studies of such accommodations specifically, as well as a paucity of data defining the needs of this population in general. The purpose of this study was to explore how people with communication and swallowing difficulties are characterized in the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), a nationally representative survey of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older, and how they manage their healthcare. Cross-sectional data from the NHATS rounds 5 to 9 (2015–2019) resulted in 8,038 unique respondents, 3,243 of who reported speech, memory, hearing, and/or swallowing difficulties. More than 90% of respondents with communication difficulties reported having a regular doctor. Less than 60% of respondents with communication difficulties had a family member or caregiver go to medical appointments with them, and around 70% of that subset of participants received help from that caregiver with communication during appointments. Fewer than 15% of respondents with communication difficulties used the internet for healthcare communication or information. Less than 5% of respondents across all communication difficulty categories had received rehabilitation services for communication in the year prior to their survey responses. While the information gleaned from NHATS points to likely gaps between the needs people with communication disorders may have for safe and accessible healthcare, and the support available, future research is needed to improve and clarify how communication disorders are defined and characterized in large-scale surveys to generate more interpretable data. These stronger empirical foundations are needed to support cost-effectiveness analyses to advocate for better communication accessibility of healthcare settings.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are essential in patient-centered, evidence-based practice in speech-language pathology. PROs respect individuals who live with communication disorders as key stakeholders providing a critically unique perspective on consequences of communication disorders, and whether interventions bring about meaningful changes. Some PROs focus on specific communication symptoms such as voice or language symptom severity, while others focus on broader constructs such as quality of life. Many PROs target specific diagnostic groups. This article presents the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB), a PRO that measures communicative participation restrictions. The CPIB was based on the concept of participation, or engagement in life situations, as defined in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. It was designed to be relevant for adults across different communication disorders to facilitate clinical and research activities that may involve either comparing or aggregating data across communication disorders. The CPIB follows current PRO development protocols including systematic guidance from stakeholders through cognitive interviews, and the measurement methods of Item Response Theory that allow precise and adaptive assessment. This article reviews use of the CPIB across different diagnostic groups, and identifies needs for future efforts to expand the relevance of the CPIB further.

Patient-provider communication skills training programs rarely include content addressing how health care providers can improve communication with patients exhibiting dysarthria and other communication disorders. Consequently, these patients often struggle to access quality health care services. This article describes a training program focused on giving health care students the opportunity to interact with standardized patients portraying dysarthria and aphasia. A summary of the program's outcome is then provided from the perspective of the students involved as well as lessons students taught us about how to continue improving this type of program and to make it a more universal part of health care education.