Abstract
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) developed the National Outcomes Measurement System for aggregating standardized patient outcomes. Outcomes are standardized using Functional Communication Measures (FCM), scales designed to describe communicative function across specific areas of clinical need. This investigation compared in-person and telepractice service delivery for children in elementary school settings who received treatment targeting the FCM categories of either “spoken language production” or “spoken language comprehension.” De-identified cases were secured from ASHA's NOMS database and the database of a private e-learning provider that implemented the NOMS format. There were minimal significant differences in the median change scores between the traditional and telepractice interventions. These results support comparable treatment outcomes between in-person service delivery and telepractice for treatment of children exhibiting impaired spoken language production or spoken language comprehension in an elementary school setting.
Highlights
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) developed the National Outcomes Measurement System for aggregating standardized patient outcomes
Functional Communication Measures (FCM) are scales designed as part of the National Outcomes Measurement System (NOMS) to allow a standardized format for clinical observations across various communicative functions
The NOMS FCMs provided the common metric used to compare the intervention provided through traditional services and those provided via telepractice
Summary
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) developed the National Outcomes Measurement System for aggregating standardized patient outcomes. Outcomes are standardized using Functional Communication Measures (FCM), scales designed to describe communicative function across specific areas of clinical need This investigation compared inperson and telepractice service delivery for children in elementary school settings who received treatment targeting the FCM categories of either “spoken language production” or “spoken language comprehension.”. There were minimal significant differences in the median change scores between the traditional and telepractice interventions These results support comparable treatment outcomes between in-person service delivery and telepractice for treatment of children exhibiting impaired spoken language production or spoken language comprehension in an elementary school setting. The lack of licensing portability across states, despite national accreditation standards and certification requirements, has impeded widespread adoption of telepractice services (Jakubowitz, 2011) It is well-known that delayed or lack of services negatively impacts young and school-age children’s development and education (McGill et al, 2020). The current study, which addresses two other FCM categories (e.g., “spoken language production” and “spoken language comprehensions”), expands the evidence comparing in-person service delivery with telepractice service delivery in elementary school settings using larger sample sizes based on our authors’ collective experience in this area
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
