Search

Purpose: This study examines how ultrasound biofeedback and intensive treatment distribution affect speech sound generalization during an evidence-based treatment, Speech Motor Chaining, for children with persisting speech errors associated with childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). Method: In a 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial, children ages 9-17 years meeting CAS criteria were randomized to receive (a) a distributed treatment (20 sessions twice weekly over 10 weeks) or intensive treatment (20 hr in 5 weeks, with 10 hr in Week 1) and (b) treatment with or without biofeedback. Due to the COVID pandemic, some participants were randomized to distributed/intensive telepractice treatment only. The primary outcome was percent target sounds correct on untreated phrases (i.e., generalization) at the 10-week time point. More than 50,000 narrow phonetic transcriptions were analyzed. Results: Forty-eight participants completed treatment. Intensive treatment significantly increased generalization at all time points. The effect of biofeedback was significant at 5 weeks from the start of treatment but not significant at the primary 10-week time point. However, when comparing each group immediately after their 20 hr of treatment finished, generalization was significantly greater in intensive over distributed treatment and greater in ultrasound over no-ultrasound treatment (with a significant interaction favoring intensive treatment with ultrasound). Only the advantage of intensive treatment remained significant 5 weeks after groups finished treatment. There was no significant difference between face-to-face and telepractice modalities. Conclusions: When the number of treatment hours is fixed, an intensive schedule of Speech Motor Chaining facilitated greater improvement than a distributed schedule. Ultrasound biofeedback initially accelerated learning, but the benefits may dissipate as treatment continues or after it ends.