Quality of Life in adults who stutter

Abstract: Although persistent developmental stuttering is known to affect daily living, just how great the impact is remains unclear. Furthermore, little is known about the underlying mechanisms which lead to a diminished quality of life (QoL). The primary objective of this study is to explore to what extent QoL is impaired in adults who stutter (AWS). In addition, this study aims to identify determinants of QoL in AWS by testing relationships between stuttering severity, coping, functioning and QoL and by testing for differences in variable scores between two AWS subgroups: receiving therapy versus not receiving therapy. A total of 91 AWS filled in several questionnaires to assess their stuttering severity, daily functioning, coping style and QoL. The QoL instruments used were the Health Utility Index 3 (HUI3) and the EuroQoL EQ-5D and EQ-VAS. The results indicated that moderate to severe stuttering has a negative impact on overall quality of life; HUI3 derived QoL values varied from .91 (for mild stuttering) to .73 (for severe stuttering). The domains of functioning that were predominantly affected were the individual’s speech, emotion, cognition and pain as measured by the HUI3 and daily activities and anxiety/depression as measured by the EQ-5D. AWS in the therapy group rated their stuttering as more severe and recorded more problems on the HUI3 speech domain than AWS in the non-therapy group. The EQ-VAS was the only instrument that showed a significant difference in overall QoL between groups. Finally, it was found that the relationship between stuttering severity and QoL was influenced by the individual’s coping style (emotion-oriented and task-oriented). These findings highlight the need for further research into stuttering in relation to QoL, and for a broader perspective on the diagnosis and treatment of stuttering, which would take into consideration quality of life and its determinants

Does a narrative retelling task improve the assessment of language proficiency in school-aged children born very preterm?

Almost half of the children born very preterm (VP) experience language difficulties at school-age, specifically with more complex language tasks. Narrative retelling is such a task. Therefore, we explored the value of narrative retelling assessment in school-aged children born VP, compared to item-based language assessment. In 63 children born VP and 30 age-matched full-term (FT) controls Renfrew’s Bus Story Test and Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals were assessed. The retelling of the Bus Story was transcribed and language complexity and content measures were analyzed with Computerised Language Analysis software. Narrative outcomes of the VP group were worse than that of the FT group. Group differences were significant for the language complexity measures, but not for the language content measures. However, the mean narrative composite score of the VP group was significantly better than their mean item-based language score, while in the FT group the narrative score was worse than the item-based score. Significant positive correlations between narrative and item-based language scores were found only in the VP group. In conclusion, in VP children narrative retelling appears to be less sensitive to detecting academic language problems than item-based language assessment. This might be related to the mediating role of attention in item-based tasks, that appears not to affect more spontaneous language tasks such as retelling. Therefore, in school-aged children born VP we recommend using narrative assessment, in addition to item-based assessments, because it is more related to spontaneous language and less sensitive to attention problems

Direct versus indirect treatment for preschool children who stutter: The RESTART randomized trial

Objective Stuttering is a common childhood disorder. There is limited high quality evidence regarding options for best treatment. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of direct treatment with indirect treatment in preschool children who stutter. Methods In this multicenter randomized controlled trial with an 18 month follow-up, preschool children who stutter who were referred for treatment were randomized to direct treatment (Lidcombe Program; n = 99) or indirect treatment (RESTART-DCM treatment; n = 100). Main inclusion criteria were age 3-6 years, ≥ 3% syllables stuttered (%SS), and time since onset ≥ 6 months. The primary outcome was the percentage of non-stuttering children at 18 months. Secondary outcomes included stuttering frequency (%SS), stuttering severity ratings by the parents and therapist, severity rating by the child, health-related quality of life, emotional and behavioral problems, and speech attitude. Results Percentage of non-stuttering children for direct treatment was 76.5% (65/85) versus 71.4% (65/91) for indirect treatment (Odds Ratio (OR), 0.6; 95% CI, 0.1-2.4, p = .42). At 3 months, children treated by direct treatment showed a greater decline in %SS (significant interaction time x therapy: β = -1.89; t(282.82) = -2.807, p = .005). At 18 months, stuttering frequency was 1.2% (SD 2.1) for direct treatment and 1.5% (SD 2.1) for indirect treatment. Direct treatment had slightly better scores on most other secondary outcome measures, but no differences between treatment approaches were significant. Conclusions Direct treatment decreased stuttering more quickly during the first three months of treatment. At 18 months, however, clinical outcomes for direct and indirect treatment were comparable. These results imply that at 18 months post treatment onset, both treatments are roughly equal in treating developmental stuttering in ways that surpass expectations of natural recovery. Follow-up data are needed to confirm these findings in the longer term

Effectiveness of Stuttering Modification Treatment in School-Age Children Who Stutter:A Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE: This study investigated the effectiveness of the stuttering modification intervention Kinder Dürfen Stottern (KIDS) in school-age children who stutter. METHOD: Seventy-three children who stutter were included in this multicenter, two-group parallel, randomized, wait-list controlled trial with a follow-up of 12 months. Children aged 7-11 years were recruited from 34 centers for speech therapy and randomized to either the immediate-treatment group or the 3 months delayed-treatment group. KIDS was provided by 26 clinicians who followed a treatment manual. Although the primary outcome measure was the impact of stuttering (Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering-School-Age [OASES-S]), the secondary outcomes included objective and subjective data on stuttering severity. RESULTS: At 3 months postrandomization, the mean score changes of the OASES-S differed significantly between the experimental (n = 33) and control group (n = 29; p = .026). Furthermore, treatment outcomes up to 12 months were analyzed (n = 59), indicating large effects of time on the OASES-S score (p &lt; .001, partial η2= .324). This was paralleled by significant improvements in parental ratings and objective ratings (stuttering severity, frequency, and physical concomitants). CONCLUSIONS: The significant short-term treatment effects in the OASES-S are in line with the (initial) focus of KIDS on cognitive and affective aspects of stuttering. Over 12 months, these changes were maintained and accompanied by behavioral improvements. The results suggest that individual treatment with KIDS is an adequate treatment option for this age group. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24207864.</p

The orbit space of groupoids whose C∗C^*-algebras are GCR

Let $G$ be second countable locally compact Hausdorff groupoid with a continuous Haar system. We remove the assumption of amenability in a theorem by Clark about GCR groupoid $C^*$-algebras. We show that if the groupoid $C^*$-algebra of $G$ is GCR then the orbits of $G$ are locally closed.Comment: 1

What is the optimal assessment of speech?:A multicentre, international evaluation of speech assessment in 2500 patients with a cleft

OBJECTIVES: Speech problems in patients with a cleft palate are often complex and multifactorial. Finding the optimal way of monitoring these problems is challenging. The International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) has developed a set of standardised outcome measures at specific ages for patients with a cleft lip and/or palate, including measures of speech assessment. This study evaluates the type and timing of speech outcome measures currently included in this ICHOM Standard Set. Additionally, speech assessments in other cleft protocols and initiatives are discussed. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: An international, multicentre study was set up including centres from the USA and the Netherlands. Outcomes of clinical measures and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) were collected retrospectively according to the ICHOM set. PROM data from a field test of the CLEFT-Q, a questionnaire developed and validated for patients with a cleft, were collected, including participants from countries with all sorts of income statuses, to examine the value of additional moments of measurement that are used in other cleft initiatives.Data from 2500 patients were included. Measured outcomes contained univariate regression analyses, trend analyses, t-tests, correlations and floor and ceiling effects. RESULTS: PROMs correlated low to moderate with clinical outcome measures. Clinical outcome measures correlated low to moderate with each other too. In contrast, two CLEFT-Q Scales correlated strongly with each other. All PROMs and the Percent Consonants Correct (PCC) showed an effect of age. In patients with an isolated cleft palate, a ceiling effect was found in the Intelligibility in Context Scale. CONCLUSION: Recommendations for an optimal speech outcome assessment in cleft patients are made. Measurement moments of different cleft protocols and initiatives are considered in this proposition. Concerning the type of measures, adjustment of the current PCC score outcome seems appropriate. For centres with adequate resources and specific interest in research, translation and validation of an upcoming tool, the Cleft Audit Protocol for Speech Augmented, is recommended.</p