Australian Speech-language Pathologists Research Articles

Aligned or misaligned: Are public funding models for speech-language pathology reflecting recommended evidence? An exploratory survey of Australian speech-language pathologists

Government subsidised funding arrangements serve as an essential medium for families to access private speech-language pathology (SLP) services in Australia. This study aimed to investigate whether, from a provider perspective, contemporary public funding models (PFMs) align with best-available scientific evidence for management of children and young persons with swallowing and communication disorders within Australian private-practice settings. This exploratory study was distributed to paediatric speech-language pathologists throughout Australia via an online survey. A total of 121 valid surveys were completed by Australian speech-language pathologists with divergent career experiences. In comparing three familiar PFMs using mixed effects logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios, results indicated that perceived congruence with recommended scientific evidence for SLP management varied across PFMs: the odds of failing to align with scientific evidence was 4.92 times higher for Medicare’s Chronic Disease Management Plan (MBS_CDMP) than for the National Disability Insurance Scheme; and 7.40 times higher in comparison to Medicare’s Helping Children with Autism initiative. This study is the first to report on (in)congruence between PFMs that provide access to independent Australian SLP services for children and young persons and best available scientific evidence to inform clinical practice. Participants identified that: (a) four out of seven contemporary PFMs were unfamiliar to speech-language pathologists; and (b) MBS_CDMP initiative failed to align with the evidence-base for best scientific SLP management.

The role of speech-language pathologists in frailty: An Australian qualitative study of perceptions, practices, and opportunities

Purpose Frailty is an important geriatric syndrome, yet the role of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in identifying and managing frailty remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to explore the perspectives of SLPs regarding frailty, including enablers, barriers, and opportunities for multidisciplinary improvements to frailty prevention and management. Method In this exploratory qualitative study, data were collected from SLPs through online semi-structured interviews and analysed using a qualitative descriptive approach. Result Seven Australian SLPs from acute, rehabilitation, geriatric, and community settings were interviewed. Three overarching themes were created: (1) SLPs understand the clinical manifestation of frailty but do not use explicit language to describe it; (2) SLPs acknowledged the importance of addressing knowledge gaps and barriers in frailty management; and (3) SLPs do not currently have an established identity within the frailty field, but do have a role within the multidisciplinary team and the care of people living with frailty. Conclusion Participants’ understandings of frailty varied and highlighted the lack of education about frailty as barriers to effective service provision. Additional research is required to produce formal recommendations for SLPs regarding frailty management, which may include frailty education to SLPs and awareness of SLPs’ role within the multidisciplinary team.

The knowledge, confidence and attitudes of Australian speech-language pathologists in augmentative and alternative communication for children and young people

The knowledge, confidence and attitudes of Australian speech-language pathologists in augmentative and alternative communication for children and young people

Perceptions and experiences of Australian speech-language pathologists who use the Lidcombe Program with children who stutter

Purpose: Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) have varying levels of training and experience working with children who stutter (CWS). They often work in contexts and populations that require clinical management to take them beyond the borders of translating clinical trial protocols and evidence-based practice (EBP). This study sought to investigate the clinical experiences of Australian SLPs working with CWS, including their Lidcombe Program confidence and practices. Method: A cross-sectional online survey was completed by 215 Australian SLPs during 2017–2020. They were recruited prior to attending one of 14 workshops hosted by Speech Pathology Australia (SPA). Result: Participants worked in a range of contexts and were from all states and territories. The majority assessed and/or treated up to five CWS annually. Six predictor variables were considered for self-reported clinical confidence. The quantitative analysis identified that an SLP’s previous training, reading the SPA stuttering management clinical guideline, and the annual number of CWS treated were found to significantly impact self-reported clinical confidence. Themes included: (1) client, family, service, and context factors that influence clinical decision-making; (2) SLP areas of clinical strength and aspects of paediatric stuttering management requiring further development; and (3) factors that impact Lidcombe Program success and modifications. Conclusion: This study has found that Australian SLPs working with CWS identify a range of important factors that impact their practice.

The Million-Dollar Question: What are the Ethical Considerations of Public Funding Provisions for Australian Speech-Language Pathologists Engaged in Independent Practice?

The Million-Dollar Question: What are the Ethical Considerations of Public Funding Provisions for Australian Speech-Language Pathologists Engaged in Independent Practice?

Benefits of a professional development course on transcription for practising speech-language pathologists

Purpose: Transcription of speech sounds is a fundamental skill used by speech-language pathologists. Little is known about the impact of professional development courses on transcription accuracy and confidence. This study explored speech-language pathologists’ use and perceptions of transcription and the effect of a professional development course on their transcription accuracy and confidence. Method: A quasi-experimental, one-group pretest-posttest design was used. Twenty-two Australian speech-language pathologists working with children with speech sound disorders participated in the course. Participants transcribed single words and completed a survey about confidence, perceptions, and the use of transcription at both time points. Result: The number of participants who reported feeling confident about using transcription significantly increased from 36.84% pre-training to 68.42% post-training. Transcription accuracy of phonemes based on point-to-point accuracy was high pre-training (88.97%) and did not significantly improve. Participants identified strategies to maintain their transcription skills. Conclusion: This study suggests speech-language pathologists transcribe single words in typical speech with high accuracy using broad transcription, and that participating in a transcription professional development course increases their transcription confidence. Further research is needed to explore different delivery methods of professional development, the impact of professional development on transcription accuracy of disordered speech, and the long-term impacts of professional development on transcription accuracy and confidence.

Australian speech-language pathologists’ self-rated confidence, knowledge, and skill on constructs essential to practising in literacy with children and adolescents

Purpose To investigate Australian speech-language pathologists’ (SLPs’) knowledge of language and literacy constructs, skills in linguistic manipulation, and self-rated ability and confidence. Method Two hundred and thirty-one SLPs from across Australia completed an online knowledge and skill assessment survey. Result There was substantial individual variability regarding performance on items measuring the knowledge and skills of essential literacy constructs. SLPs were most likely to rate their confidence in providing intervention for phonological and phonemic awareness as "very good" or "expert". They reported lower confidence providing intervention for all other aspects of literacy. The majority of SLPs reported what they described as inadequate preservice training to practise in literacy. There was variability between respondents in their self-reported alignment with approaches and beliefs that are unsupported by current research evidence on reading instruction and support. Conclusion The level and consistency of SLPs’ literacy knowledge and skills requires improvement. The perception of inadequate preparation to practise in literacy may mean that SLPs are reluctant to engage in this area of practice. Minimum accreditation requirements specifically for literacy are recommended, together with assurance of ongoing professional learning opportunities spanning all components of literacy.

Australian speech-language pathologists’ experiences and perceptions of working with children who stutter: A qualitative study

PurposeEffective early intervention is recommended to ameliorate the potential long term negative effects of stuttering. Efficacious treatments are available, but speech-language pathologists (SLPs) report finding implementation to be challenging due to a range of clinician, client and clinical context factors. Previous survey-based research has found that SLPs lack self-efficacy working with CWS, however the reasons contributing to this are not well understood. This study presents the first in-depth analysis of the current practices and perceptions of SLPs working with children who stutter (CWS). MethodsIn this qualitative study 18 Australian SLPs who provide services to CWS were interviewed using a semi-structured interview approach. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. ResultsThe thematic analysis identified four themes: (1) A stronger sense of self-efficacy is needed in stuttering management compared to other areas of clinical practice; 2) SLPs’ sense of self-efficacy in stuttering management is influenced by early career experiences, client factors and the practice context; 3) Professional development and collaboration strengthen self-efficacy; and 4) Parental involvement and engagement are crucial to treatment success. ConclusionSLP self-efficacy for working with CWS appears a critical factor in the provision of effective management for this population. This study provides an in-depth analysis of the role of SLP self-efficacy and the factors that influence it.

Oesophageal screening in videofluoroscopic swallow studies: Perceptions and practices of Australian speech-language pathologists

Purpose There is building evidence that oesophageal screening (OS) should be considered a critical component of videofluoroscopic swallow studies (VFSS). This study surveyed Australian speech-language pathologists (SLPs) regarding current practices and perceptions of OS in VFSS. Method A 16–24 item online survey was distributed to Australian SLPs via relevant email forums. One response per site was requested. Survey questions explored experience and training in VFSS, skill and confidence with OS, OS protocol use, and pathways following OS. Result One hundred and one SLPs across all Australian states and territories responded, with 70% (n = 69/99) from metropolitan hospitals and 74% (n = 75/101) having more than five years’ VFSS experience. While 69% (n = 70/101) of SLPs conducted OS, only half (n = 35/70) conducted OS routinely, and only 4% (n = 3/70) always used published OS protocols. Barriers to OS, for some participants, were concerns about scope of practice and confidence. Conclusion This study confirms higher levels of OS in Australia compared to similar international surveys and provides rich data on the Australian context. Prescriptive clinical guidelines for OS, consensus regarding a preferred OS protocol, and specific OS training may clarify SLP scope of practice and improve SLP confidence and standardisation in OS.

Australian Speech-Language Pathologists’ Knowledge and Application of Key Word Sign

Australian Speech-Language Pathologists’ Knowledge and Application of Key Word Sign

The current practices of Australian speech-language pathologists in providing communication services to children with autism spectrum disorder

Purpose Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) is fundamental to speech-language pathology practice. Australian speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who treat communication disorders in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) face unique challenges in implementing EBP. Challenges may include selecting an intervention from a myriad of available interventions for use within a complex population. Identification of current practices of Australian SLPs in communication service provision to children with ASD will provide a baseline for use of EBP and may guide future efforts to engage in EBP. Method A total of 109 Australian SLPs who provide communication services to children with ASD completed an online survey. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyse service delivery and participant experiences of EBP. Result The most common barrier to delivering EBP was inadequate resources. The most utilised strategy was discussing evidence with colleagues. Most participants reported using therapies which did not adhere to a standard protocol, such as eclectic approaches. The majority also reported use of outcome measures which they believe adequately represent functional communication changes for their client. Conclusion Resource limitations may result in over-reliance on interventions lacking empirical support and over-reliance on subjective outcome measurement tools. Reflective practice and self-evaluation of communication services to children with ASD may support improved provision of EBP.

The who, why, when, where, what and how of using outcome measures in dysarthria: A qualitative exploration of speech-language pathologists’ perspectives

Purpose To date, little research has explored clinical assessment practices in the management of dysarthria. The aim of the present study was to explore the practices and perspectives of Australian speech-language pathologists (SLPs) regarding outcome measures (OMs) in the management of dysarthria, including barriers and enablers to their use. Method A focus group methodology was used to explore the practices and perspectives of 16 SLPs working with adults with dysarthria. The 4 focus groups were transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis with barriers and enablers to the use of OMs analysed according to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Result Seven categories were identified regarding SLPs’ practices and perspectives on the use of OMs in dysarthria management. These were related to the importance of assessments, OMs currently and not currently being utilised, ideal assessment features, perspectives on the development of a core set of OMs in dysarthria management, and perceived enablers and barriers to the use of OMs. Each category had a number of constituent subcategories. Overarching the categories was the theme: the who, why, when, where, what and how of dysarthria outcome measurement. Conclusion The use of OMs in dysarthria is influenced by a range of factors including: the clinical setting, patient factors, and where and when the patient is in their recovery journey. Variability in the assessments used suggests that formal measures may not meet current clinical needs.

Treating Childhood Speech Sound Disorders: Current Approaches to Management by Australian Speech-Language Pathologists.

Purpose This study explored the intervention processes used by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to treat children with speech sound disorders (SSDs). Method Semistructured, individual, in-depth interviews were conducted with 11 Australian SLPs. Inductive content analysis was used to classify the data to provide a description of current intervention processes for children with SSDs. Results Three main factors were identified relating to the intervention processes used by SLPs: (a) target selection, (b) therapy approaches, and (c) structural and procedural aspects of therapy sessions, including feedback. The findings revealed that SLPs often combine elements of four therapies: the minimal pairs approach, traditional articulatory approaches, auditory discrimination, and Cued Articulation. Initial therapy targets typically aligned with a developmental approach or were functional speech targets with meaningful relevance to the child and their family. Conclusions These findings contribute to the current state of knowledge about the intervention processes used by SLPs for children with SSDs. The use of hybrid speech pathology therapies, which combined elements of favored approaches, was common. Hybrid methods were intended to help tailor the interventions to individual needs. Client needs were highly prioritized by SLPs and influenced their choice of therapy targets and therapy approaches.

What does a family who is “engaged” in early intervention look like? Perspectives of Australian speech-language pathologists

Purpose To build a description of what engagement in early speech-language pathology intervention looks like, by exploring speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) perceptions of (1) what characteristics best describe families who are “engaged” in early speech-language pathology intervention and (2) which characteristics are most important for engagement. Method Group concept mapping, a participatory mixed-methods research approach, was used to represent the perspectives of Australian SLPs working with children aged 0–8 years and their families in early intervention. Using Concept Systems software, participants: (1) brainstormed responses to a focus question (n = 58); (2) grouped statements into categories (n = 34); and (3) rated the importance of each statement (n = 29). Result SLPs identified 108 characteristics of engagement in early speech-language pathology intervention, which were grouped into seven key concepts: (1) the family is reliable and ready for therapy; (2) the family has an open, honest relationship with the SLP; (3) the family actively participates and takes initiative; (4) the family works in partnership to plan and set goals together; (5) the family sees and celebrates progress; (6) the family invests in intervention at home; and (7) the family understands intervention and advocates for their child. All aspects of engagement were considered important by participants, with the family-SLP relationship and families continuing to invest in intervention at home being rated most highly. Conclusion Results present a picture of engagement which has been informed by stakeholders, and which goes beyond aspects of engagement which have previously been identified in the literature. Families who are engaged in early speech-language pathology intervention are actively invested and involved in intervention in various ways, both inside and outside the clinic room.

Drooling in children with neurodisability: A survey of Australian speech–language pathologists’ practice

Purpose: In the absence of evidence-based guidelines, this study sought to understand current speech-language pathologists’ (SLPs) practice when treating drooling in children with a neurodisability.Method: Descriptive research using cross-sectional survey methodology. Online survey methods were used to obtain specific information on Australian SLPs’ self-reported assessment and treatment practices relative to working with children with neurodisability who drool. Questions focussed on level of expertise, treatment approaches and barriers to evidence-based practice (EBP) in this area. Participants were sourced through three targeted associations/organisations. Data were analysed using descriptive and non-parametric statistics.Result: Participants were Australian SLPs who had recent experience working with children with neurodisability who drool (n = 68). They favoured informal rather than formal methods for assessment. Preferred treatment techniques included behavioural intervention methods (46–53%) and modifying positioning (43.3%). Client suitability dominated reasoning regarding treatment selection (60%) with 57% of SLPs reporting EBP barriers.Conclusion: Drooling was perceived to be a complex practice area for which SLPs desire additional education. Despite availability, valid and reliable assessments of drooling were not commonly used. Clinicians have limited evidence to support their practice: further research is needed to establish evidence-based treatments for drooling.

Speech-language pathologists and adult palliative care in Australia

Purpose This research explored the role of Australian Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) to identify SLP experiences and practices regarding adult palliative care (PC) management. Method Utilising mixed methods, phase one comprised a literature scoping review of SLP practices in PC. Phase two involved a survey compiling demographic data of Australian SLPs working in adult PC. Phase three involved in-depth interviews exploring SLP experiences in PC. Result It was found that minimal resources or published literature existed regarding SLPs in PC, however the available literature indicated SLPs can be valuable and influential members of a PC team. Interviewed SLPs acknowledged their proficiency in end-of-life communication and swallowing, nevertheless initially they felt ill-prepared given insufficient knowledge or skills to manage palliative cases based upon their tertiary education and were poorly supported once in the field given a lack of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Participants also noted a lack of knowledge among medical, nursing and allied health clinicians about a SLP’s contribution to PC, causing barriers for SLPs being professionally accepted within palliative environments. Conclusion Recommendations included the development of improved resources specifically about SLP practice in end-of-life care, the need for greater exposure at the tertiary level of SLP palliative care practices, and CPGs for SLPs working in adult palliative care.

A survey of speech-language pathology treatment for non-progressive dysarthria in Australia

AbstractAim:To identify management practices of Australian speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in the treatment of non-progressive dysarthria using a subsystem approach, and to explore SLPs’ consideration and implementation of the theoretical underpinnings of non-progressive dysarthria management.Method:A 39-item online survey was distributed to Australian SLPs, with 80 responses suitable for data analysis.Results:Practices of SLPs were variable for the management of the speech subsystems. The Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT®) was the most commonly used manualised treatment program, and was employed by 63.77% of respondents. Almost all SLPs (>88%) provided strategies to improve functional communication. There was no clear preference for low tech alternative and augmentative communication (AAC) devices. Speech generating devices were the most commonly employed high tech device. Almost two-thirds of respondents used non-speech oral motor exercises (NSOMEs) in treatment. SLPs had varied frequencies and models of service delivery for intervention. SLPs valued interventions targeting the activity and participation domains of the ICF, however this was restricted by the treatment context and resources available. The majority of SLPs (92.06%) were aware of the principles of motor learning, however many were unsure regarding the specifics of implementation.Conclusion:There is a clear need for further research into the efficacy of treatment techniques to guide decision-making.

Use of Transcription when Assessing Children’s Speech: Australian Speech-Language Pathologists’ Practices, Challenges, and Facilitators

Objective: There is currently limited knowledge on the useof transcription in the management of children with speech sound disorders (SSD) by speech-language pathologists in Australia. This study explored the use of transcription, the facilitators, and challenges of transcription use, and differences in the use of detailed transcription with various client groups. Method and Participants: Eighty-four participants (speech-language pathologists working in Australia) completed an online exploratory survey which included closed and open-ended questions. Results: 95% of participants reported using transcription. The three most commonly reported strategies/resources were transcription charts (81%), self-practice (68%), and websites (42%). Transcription challenges included the use of two vowel notation systems, reduced proficiency in transcription, service delivery issues, sampling/recording issues, and issues with using transcription to communicate. Finally, results from this survey found that participants use detailed transcription more often when recording the speech of children with childhood apraxia of speech and craniofacial impairment compared to using transcription to document the speech of children who have SSD of unknown origin. Most participants (91%) had not attended transcription professional development. Conclusions: These findings have implications for the university training of speech-language pathologists and for the establishment of professional development courses for practising speech-language pathologists in Australia.

What are the usual assessment practices in adult non-progressive dysarthria rehabilitation? A survey of Australian dysarthria practice patterns

This aim of this study was to identify assessment practices for non-progressive dysarthria used by Australian speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and to describe these practices within the framework of the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Functioning Disability, and Health (ICF). A 23-item online survey was distributed to Australian SLPs, with 56 responses suitable for data analysis. The majority of SLPs prescribed ‘high importance’ to the assessment of impairment to speech function (96%, n = 54), activity limitations (91%, n = 51) and participation in society (91%, n = 51) in non-progressive dysarthria. However, reported assessment selection for non-progressive dysarthria focused largely on impairment and intelligibility, with assessments addressing participation restrictions being under-utilised. There was also a preference for informal assessment tools across all ICF domains. Over half (69%, n = 37) indicated that current assessment tools for non-progressive dysarthria generally do not meet their needs, with key issues being time-factors and inadequate sensitivity. There was variability in the use of outcome measures for non-progressive dysarthria, with workplace setting, time constraints and a perceived lack of relevance being the most commonly reported barriers to implementation.

Evidence-based care for older people: where are we now and where to in the future?

ABSTRACTWithin contemporary health and social care for older people, it is widely accepted that best outcomes are achieved when health professionals collaborate to provide integrated, evidence-based and person-centred care. Though past studies have reported broad data about the nature of speech pathology services provided to older people, this study seeks increased understanding of factors that influence clinician choice of assessment and therapy approaches and clinician ability to provide evidence-based, interprofessional care. An online survey was used to gather data from 145 Australian speech-language pathologists working with people over the age of 65; in hospital, community, and residential aged care settings. Data reported were drawn from free text responses and analysed using thematic analysis. Results highlight the influence of clinician access to, and the dynamics of, an interprofessional team and support network as well as the availability of ongoing education on their ability to provide evidence-based, quality care. Participants emphasized the complexity of care provided to older people as necessitating team-based, coordinated care, and careful consideration of each clients’ unique abilities and limitations. Though participants acknowledged the importance of reliability and validity in the selection of assessment and therapy approaches, they commented that assessment and therapy choice was most often determined by contextual factors. To facilitate best practice, there is a need for further research, teaching, and professional development that explicitly supports speech pathology involvement in interprofessional care teams, alongside consideration of an expanded model of evidence-based decision-making that further accounts for the influence of clinical context and team dynamics.