Telepractice in the diagnosis and treatment of pediatric speech-language disorders: The opinions and experiences of speech-language pathologists

Abstract

PurposeThis prospective cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the opinions and experiences with telepractice (TP) of Dutch-speaking speech-language pathologists (SLPs) living in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium (Flanders). This study will help to optimize care for children with speech-language disorders as we will gain more insight into the experienced barriers and facilitators while using TP for assessing and treating these disorders. MethodTwenty-nine Dutch-speaking speech-language pathologists living in Flanders (age category 20–30 years: n = 16/29, 55.2%, 31–40 years: n = 10/29, 34.2%, 41–50 years: n = 2/29, 6.9%, 51–60 years: n = 1/29, 3.4%) were recruited through the social media. An online questionnaire was developed based on the available literature and administered to the SLPs. To compare the opinions and experiences of SLPs with TP, χ2 tests or Fisher's exact tests were used. ResultsThe study showed a statistically significant association between years of clinical experience of SLPs and their opinion that TP does not provide more options in a clinical setting compared to face-to-face contact. SLPs who had expertise in multiple domains experienced significantly more added value of TP during the corona pandemic than SLPs who had expertise in only one specific domain. Additionally, SLPs who worked in a private practice indicated significantly more difficulties in developing a therapeutic relationship due to a lack of personal contact than SLPs who worked in other settings. 51.7% (15/29) of the SLPs experienced technical barriers using TP. ConclusionExpertise in multiple domains of pediatric speech-language therapy resulted in experiencing more added value of TP during the corona pandemic, possibly because of the experience of multiple different and simultaneous advantages of TP in several domains. Additionally, SLPs in a private practice experienced more difficulties in developing a therapeutic relationship due to a lack of personal contact with their clients. This is in contrast to hospitals where children are often seen for a shorter period. Hence, there may be less chance of a negative perception of relationships with clients. Another conclusion is that treatment drop-out was not larger using TP compared to face-to-face therapy. However, SLPs experienced that the use of TP was not promoted/encouraged by their employer possibly because of technical barriers. It is hoped that the findings of this study will help SLPs and policymakers overthrow existing barriers and make telepractice a substantial, effective, and efficient service delivery model.