Speech-driven environmental control systems - a qualitative analysis of users' perceptions

Purpose. To explore users' experiences and perceptions of speech-driven environmental control systems (SPECS) as part of a larger project aiming to develop a new SPECS. The motivation for this part of the project was to add to the evidence base for the use of SPECS and to determine the key design specifications for a new speech-driven system from a user's perspective. Method. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 users of SPECS from around the United Kingdom. These interviews were transcribed and analysed using a qualitative method based on framework analysis. Results. Reliability is the main influence on the use of SPECS. All the participants gave examples of occasions when their speech-driven system was unreliable; in some instances, this unreliability was reported as not being a problem (e.g., for changing television channels); however, it was perceived as a problem for more safety critical functions (e.g., opening a door). Reliability was cited by participants as the reason for using a switch-operated system as back up. Benefits of speech-driven systems focused on speech operation enabling access when other methods were not possible; quicker operation and better aesthetic considerations. Overall, there was a perception of increased independence from the use of speech-driven environmental control. Conclusions. In general, speech was considered a useful method of operating environmental controls by the participants interviewed; however, their perceptions regarding reliability often influenced their decision to have backup or alternative systems for certain functions

Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke

Our review provides some evidence of the effectiveness of SLT (speech and language therapy) for people with aphasia following stroke in terms of improved functional communication, receptive and expressive language. However, some trials were poorly reported. The potential benefits of intensive SLT over conventional SLT were confounded by a significantly higher dropout from intensive SLT. More participants also withdrew from social support than SLT interventions. There was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion regarding the effectiveness of any one specific SLT approach over another

Attention control comparisons with SLT for people with aphasia following stroke: methodological concerns raised following a systematic review

Objective: Attention control comparisons in trials of stroke rehabilitation require care to minimize the risk of comparison choice bias. We compared the similarities and differences in SLT and social support control interventions for people with aphasia. Data sources: Trial data from the 2016 Cochrane systematic review of SLT for aphasia after stroke. Methods: Direct and indirect comparisons between SLT, social support and no therapy controls. We double-data extracted intervention details using the template for intervention description and replication. Standardized mean differences and risk ratios (95% confidence intervals (CIs)) were calculated. Results: Seven trials compared SLT with social support (n  =  447). Interventions were matched in format, frequency, intensity, duration and dose. Procedures and materials were often shared across interventions. Social support providers received specialist training and support. Targeted language rehabilitation was only described in therapy interventions. Higher drop-out (P  =  0.005, odds ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.32–0.81) and non-adherence to social support interventions (P  <  0.00001, OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09–0.37) indicated an imbalance in completion rates increasing the risk of control comparison bias. Conclusion: Distinctions between social support and therapy interventions were eroded. Theoretically based language rehabilitation was the remaining difference in therapy interventions. Social support is an important adjunct to formal language rehabilitation. Therapists should continue to enable those close to the person with aphasia to provide tailored communication support, functional language stimulation and opportunities to apply rehabilitation gains. Systematic group differences in completion rates is a design-related risk of bias in outcomes observed

Predictors and outcomes of speech and language therapists' treatment decisions

This study investigated predictors of decisions made by speech and language therapists (SLTs) to offer intervention for pre-school children and the children's outcomes relative to that decision. The study uses data from 347 children who were first assessed aged under 3 years 6 months by community speech and language therapists in the UK. Of these, 158 were offered therapy, 189 were either discharged or offered only monitoring appointments. After adjusting for the child's age and gender, six variables were significantly associated with the therapist's original decision: being a quiet baby, not using two word utterances or making comments on their play, being unintelligible to strangers and the child's score on auditory comprehension and expressive language scales of the Preschool Language Scales (PLS-3). These show a focus on communication variables rather than broader demographic and medical variables. At follow-up, aged 7 - 9 years, 56% of the children were available for re-assessment. Therapists' decisions at initial assessment show a sensitivity of .85 and a specificity of .61 relative to children's outcomes. Of the 191 children seen at follow-up, 21 were deemed to have ongoing difficulties

Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke

Background  Aphasia is an acquired language impairment following brain damage that affects some or all language modalities: expression and understanding of speech, reading, and writing. Approximately one third of people who have a stroke experience aphasia.  Objectives  To assess the effects of speech and language therapy (SLT) for aphasia following stroke.  Search methods  We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 9 September 2015), CENTRAL (2015, Issue 5) and other Cochrane Library Databases (CDSR, DARE, HTA, to 22 September 2015), MEDLINE (1946 to September 2015), EMBASE (1980 to September 2015), CINAHL (1982 to September 2015), AMED (1985 to September 2015), LLBA (1973 to September 2015), and SpeechBITE (2008 to September 2015). We also searched major trials registers for ongoing trials including ClinicalTrials.gov (to 21 September 2015), the Stroke Trials Registry (to 21 September 2015), Current Controlled Trials (to 22 September 2015), and WHO ICTRP (to 22 September 2015). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials we also handsearched theInternational Journal of Language and Communication Disorders(1969 to 2005) and reference lists of relevant articles, and we contacted academic institutions and other researchers. There were no language restrictions.  Selection criteria  Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SLT (a formal intervention that aims to improve language and communication abilities, activity and participation) versus no SLT; social support or stimulation (an intervention that provides social support and communication stimulation but does not include targeted therapeutic interventions); or another SLT intervention (differing in duration, intensity, frequency, intervention methodology or theoretical approach).  Data collection and analysis  We independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of included trials. We sought missing data from investigators.  Main results  We included 57 RCTs (74 randomised comparisons) involving 3002 participants in this review (some appearing in more than one comparison). Twenty-seven randomised comparisons (1620 participants) assessed SLT versus no SLT; SLT resulted in clinically and statistically significant benefits to patients' functional communication (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.49, P = 0.01), reading, writing, and expressive language, but (based on smaller numbers) benefits were not evident at follow-up. Nine randomised comparisons (447 participants) assessed SLT with social support and stimulation; meta-analyses found no evidence of a difference in functional communication, but more participants withdrew from social support interventions than SLT. Thirty-eight randomised comparisons (1242 participants) assessed two approaches to SLT. Functional communication was significantly better in people with aphasia that received therapy at a high intensity, high dose, or over a long duration compared to those that received therapy at a lower intensity, lower dose, or over a shorter period of time. The benefits of a high intensity or a high dose of SLT were confounded by a significantly higher dropout rate in these intervention groups. Generally, trials randomised small numbers of participants across a range of characteristics (age, time since stroke, and severity profiles), interventions, and outcomes.  Authors' conclusions  Our review provides evidence of the effectiveness of SLT for people with aphasia following stroke in terms of improved functional communication, reading, writing, and expressive language compared with no therapy. There is some indication that therapy at high intensity, high dose or over a longer period may be beneficial. HIgh-intensity and high dose interventions may not be acceptable to all.REF Eligible with Permitted Exceptio

Negotiating excess treatment costs in a clinical research trial: the good, the bad and the innovative

Barriers to recovering the excess treatment costs associated with health research from local organisations in the United Kingdom can increase research costs, delay completion of high- quality studies and risk disenfranchising health trusts and patients from participation. The authors demonstrate how the process for recovering excess treatment costs at a local National Health Service (NHS) trust level in a multicentre study was inconsistent and resulted in excess effort and cost to the research budget. An innovative example of how an organisation acting as a broker between commissioners and researchers facilitated a more timely excess treatment cost agreement is highlighted

The impact of enhancing the effectiveness of interdisciplinary working. Section 1

This study aimed to examine the impact of an intervention to improve interdisciplinary working and explore the relationship between team working and impacts on staff and patients. The study objectives included: exploration of the relationship between different models of interdisciplinary working and related outcomes; description of a range of service models identifying strengths and limitations; and the exposition of characteristics and attributes of effectives i

Provision of powered communication aids in the United Kingdom

AAC service provision in the United Kingdom (UK) has evolved since the first service dedicated to the provision of communication aids opened in 1986. Within the UK, many health and care services are provided via government funding; however, the assessment and provision of AAC and specifically of speech-generating devices (SGDs) is inconsistent and inequitable. The study reported in this paper aimed to collect information on levels of current provision of powered communication aids (the term used in the study to refer to SGDs) by UK service providers in 2013 with the intention of improving future estimates for need of services. A questionnaire survey was designed and data were obtained from 98 AAC services across the UK. Service providers reported the number of individuals known to be using powered communication aids and the mean value reported was 0.0155% of the services? catchment populations. However levels of service provision reported were highly variable. Although the data reported must be treated with caution, it adds to the sparse literature on the topic, informs AAC service design and delivery in the UK, and acts as an indicative baseline measure for future service development

Understanding the models of community hospital rehabilitation activity (MoCHA): a mixed method study

Introduction To understand the variation in performance between community hospitals, our objectives are: to measure the relative performance (cost efficiency) of rehabilitation services in community hospitals; to identify the characteristics of community hospital rehabilitation that optimise performance; to investigate the current impact of community hospital in-patient rehabilitation for older people on secondary care and the potential impact if community hospital rehabilitation was optimised to best practice nationally; to examine the relationship between the configuration of intermediate care and secondary care bed use; and to develop toolkits for commissioners and community hospital providers to optimise performance. Methods and analysis Four linked studies will be performed. Study 1: Cost efficiency modelling will apply econometric techniques to datasets from the NHS Benchmarking Network surveys of community hospital and intermediate care. This will identify community hospitals’ performance and estimate the gap between high and low performers. Analyses will determine the potential impact if the performance of all community hospitals nationally was optimised to best performance, and examine the association between community hospital configuration and secondary care bed use. Study 2: A national community hospital survey gathering detailed cost data and efficiency variables will be performed. Study 3: In-depth case studies of three community hospitals, two high and one low performing, will be undertaken. Case studies will gather routine hospital and local health economy data. Ward culture will be surveyed. Content and delivery of treatment will be observed. Patients and staff will be interviewed. Study 4: Co-designed web-based quality improvement toolkits for commissioners and providers will be developed, including indicators of performance and the gap between local and best community hospitals performance. Ethics and dissemination Publications will be in peer reviewed journals, reports will be distributed through stakeholder organisations. Ethical approval was obtained from the Bradford Research Ethics committee (reference: 15/YH/0062)