The Language Profile of Preschool Children With 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome and the Relationship With Speech Intelligibility

Purpose: Young children with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11DS) often have impaired language development and poor speech intelligibility. Here, we report a comprehensive overview of standardized language assessment in a relatively large sample of preschool-aged children with 22q11DS. We furthermore explored whether speech ability explained variability in language skills. Method: Forty-four monolingual Dutch preschoolers (3–6 years) with a confirmed genetic 22q11DS diagnosis participated in this prospective cohort study. Standardized tests (Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Preschool-2-NL and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III-NL) were administered. Speech intelligibility was rated by two expert speech and language therapists using a standardized procedure. Results: Most children had impaired language skills across all tested domains. The composite score for expressive language was significantly lower than that for receptive language, but the two were strongly correlated. Only small differences between the mean scores on the various subtests were observed, with the lowest scores for expressive morphosyntactic skills. Language scores showed a moderate positive relation with speech intelligibility, but language abilities varied greatly among the children with intelligible speech. Conclusions: We show that the majority of preschool children with 22q11DS have a broad range of language problems. Other than the relatively larger impairment in expressive than in receptive language skills, our results do not show a clearly delineated language profile. As many of the children with intelligible speech still had below-average language scores, we highlight that language problems require a broad assessment and care in all young children with 22q11DS. Future research using spontaneous language and detailed speech analysis is recommended, to provide more in-depth understanding of children's language profile and the relationship between speech and language in 22q11DS

Language Sample Analysis in Clinical Practice: Speech-Language Pathologists' Barriers, Facilitators, and Needs

Purpose: Most speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with children with developmental language disorder (DLD) do not perform language sample analysis (LSA) on a regular basis, although they do regard LSA as highly informative for goal setting and evaluating grammatical therapy. The primary aim of this study was to identify facilitators, barriers, and needs related to performing LSA by Dutch SLPs working with children with DLD. The secondary aim was to investigate whether a training would change the actual performance of LSA. Method: A focus group with 11 SLPs working in Dutch speech-language pathology practices was conducted. Barriers, facilitators, and needs were identified using thematic analysis and categorized using the theoretical domain framework. To address the barriers, a training was developed using software program CLAN. Changes in barriers and use of LSA were evaluated with a survey sent to participants before, directly after, and 3 months posttraining. Results: The barriers reported in the focus group were SLPs' lack of knowledge and skills, time investment, negative beliefs about their capabilities, differences in beliefs about their professional role, and no reimbursement from health insurance companies. Posttraining survey results revealed that LSA was not performed more often in daily practice. Using CLAN was not the solution according to participating SLPs. Time investment remained a huge barrier. Conclusions: A training in performing LSA did not resolve the time investment barrier experienced by SLPs. User-friendly software, developed in codesign with SLPs might provide a solution. For the short-term, shorter samples, preferably from narrative tasks, should be considered

To Game or Not to Game? Efficacy of Using Tablet Games in Vocabulary Intervention for Children with DLD

The adoption of tablets by young children has raised enthusiasm and concern among speech and language pathologists. This study investigated whether tablet games can be used as effectively as real play objects in vocabulary intervention for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). A randomized, controlled non‐inferiority trial was conducted with 70 3‐year‐old children with DLD. The novel intervention group (n = 35) received 12 10‐min scripted intervention sessions with symbolic play using a tablet game spread out over 8–9 weeks. The standard intervention group (n = 35) received the same amount of intervention with real objects using the same vocabulary scripts. In each session, children were exposed to 22 target words. The primary outcome was the number of new target words learned. This was measured using a picture selection task including 22 target words and 22 control words at 3 time intervals: before the intervention, imme-diately post‐intervention, and 5 weeks later. In both intervention groups, the children learned significantly more target words than control words. No significant differences in gains between the two intervention conditions were found. This study provides evidence that vocabulary intervention for toddlers with DLD using a tablet game is equally as effective as an intervention using real ob-jects

Disentangling the Grammar of 3-to 6-Year-Old Dutch Children With a Developmental Language Disorder

Purpose: Children with a developmental language disorder (DLD) are often delayed in their grammatical development. This is suggested to be the most important characteristic and clinical marker of DLD. However, it is unknown if this assumption is valid for young children, in the earliest stages of grammatical development. For this reason, this study investigates the complexity, diversity, and accuracy of the grammatical repertoires of 3-to 6-year-old Dutch children with DLD, in comparison to that of typically developing (TD) children matched on grammatical level. Method: Language samples of 59 children (29 children with DLD and 30 TD children) were analyzed using multiple measures of grammatical complexity, diversity, and accuracy. The TD children and children with DLD were language-matched on their grammatical development using the levels of the Dutch version of the Language Assessment, Remediation, and Screening Procedure, the Taal Analyse Remediëring en Screening Procedure (TARSP; Schlichting, 2017). Thus, the children with DLD were significantly older than the TD children (respectively DLD age range: 2;7–5;4 [years;months], Mage = 4;1; and TD age range: 2;0–3;9, Mage = 2;9). Results: The results show that children with DLD are comparable to language-matched TD children in their grammatical accuracy and diversity, but that they produce less complex utterances. Conclusions: The results indicate that children with DLD lag behind in their grammatical complexity as compared to language-matched TD children. The results also suggest that grammatical TARSP level is not sufficiently informative for selecting treatment goals. Instead, the results underline the importance of conducting language sample analyses, with special reference to the complexity of the utterances of a child with DLD

Using co-design to develop a tool for shared goal-setting with parents in speech and language therapy

Background Despite the compelling case for engaging parents in speech and language therapy, research indicates that speech and language therapists (SLTs) currently have a leading role in the goal-setting process of therapy for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). Therefore, we set out to develop a tool that aims to support the dialogue between SLTs and parents and enhance shared decision-making about children's communicative participation goals. We used co-design techniques with SLT–practitioners to include their perspectives throughout the design process. Although co-design has been used for some years in healthcare research, it is still a relatively new research methodology in the field of speech and language therapy. Aims To provide a detailed description of the co-design process that led to the development of a physical artefact that can support SLTs to engage parents of children with DLD in collaborative goal-setting. Methods & Procedures The Design Council's Double Diamond model was used to develop a tool in co-design, together with eight SLTs, who participated in all stages of the development process. Usability was tested in actual goal-setting conversations between four SLTs and 11 parents of a child with DLD resulting in stepwise improvements. In addition, usability of the first and final prototypes was tested with five usability criteria that were rated on a 10-point scale by 64 SLTs. Outcomes & Results The co-design process resulted in the development of a physical prototype of the tool called ‘ENGAGE’, consisting of a metal ‘tree trunk’ on which parents can stick magnetic ‘leaves’ containing potential participation goals for their child. The ‘tree’ shape represents a child's development and opportunities for growth. This first prototype received marks between 7.0 and 8.0 out of 10 on attractiveness, user-friendliness, safety, functionality and affordability. After several iterations, there were significantly higher marks for attractiveness, user-friendliness and safety in favour for the final prototype. Marks for functionality and affordability did not change significantly. Conclusions & Implications As researchers we usually develop pen-and-paper tools, interview protocols, apps or questionnaires to support clinical practice. Including the SLTs’ perspectives in the design process resulted in a tree-shaped physical artefact that, according to the SLTs, helps to order information and encourages and guides their dialogue with parents. We strongly advocate the inclusion of end-users in developing innovative user-centred tools for speech and language therapy and we hope that this will become widespread practice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS What is already known on the subject Collaborative goal-setting is at the heart of family-centred speech and language therapy. However, research indicates that goal-setting processes for children with DLD are currently predominantly therapist-led, instead of family-centred. Reasons for the lack of parental engagement are that effective communication with parents throughout the goal-setting process appears to be complex, and parents are not always invited and supported to engage in this. We used co-design to develop a tool that aims to support SLTs in their dialogue about therapy goals with parents. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This paper provides an example of applying a co-design approach for the development of a shared goal-setting tool for SLTs and parents of young children with DLD. The co-design approach enabled us to incorporate needs, experiences and ideas of SLTs in the design process. We report the four stages in the co-design process from (1) discovering the needs, wants and desires of the people involved, (2) defining the problem that SLTs experience, (3) developing several solutions and selecting the best solution, and (4) developing and testing the prototype. The detailed description of this process can add to an understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of a design process that includes the perspective of end-users. The result is a physical artefact representing a tree, which aims to support the conversation between SLTs and parents about a child's communicative participation. Items describing facets of communicative participation are printed on ‘leaves’ that can be hung on a tree trunk by parents. The tree shape is a positive metaphor for the growth and development of a child. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This study describes how SLTs can be meaningfully involved as partners in a co-design research approach. Incorporating experience from clinical practice was highly relevant since our study aimed to create a solution that would support goal-setting and service delivery by SLTs. We want to show that it is inspiring and beneficial for SLTs to partner with researchers in innovation of their own clinical practice and provide examples of co-design activities that illustrate the involvement and influence of end-users in a design process. Including the perspective of SLTs in the development of a new tool to facilitate the dialogue between SLTs and parents of children with DLD regarding therapy goal-setting is expected to add value and enhance its implementation in clinical practice

Impact of communication partner familiarity and speech accuracy on parents’ ratings of their child for the Intelligibility in Context Scale: Dutch

Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine the role of familiarity of a communication partner on Dutch parents’ perception of their child’s intelligibility, for children with typically-developing speech (TD) or speech sound disorder (SSD). Method: Participants were 67 Dutch-speaking children (48–84 months), 48 with TD and 19 with SSD. Item scores on the parent-rated Intelligibility in Context Scale: Dutch (ICS-NL) were compared between groups and related to naive listeners’ ratings of children’s intelligibility (IR), and a measure of speech accuracy (i.e. percentage of consonants correct-adjusted, PCC-A). Result: Statistical analysis yielded a significant Group by Familiarity interaction on the ICS-NL. Parents rated the intelligibility of their child with SSD as higher with more familiar communication partners than less familiar, more so than parents of children with TD. In the SSD group, IR was more strongly correlated with ICS-NL item scores for less familiar partners. PCC-A was only correlated with ICS-NL item 7 (strangers). Conclusion: Parents perceive their children as more intelligible with people in close relationships, likely due to their higher familiarity with the child’s speech. Children’s relationships should be considered with respect to communicative participation. PCC-A may be a less reliable predictor of participation in family and community life