Use Of Speech-generating Devices Research Articles

Patient Communication Following Head and Neck Cancer Surgery: A Pilot Study Using Electronic Speech-Generating Devices

To describe the communication of patients who received electronic speech-generating devices (SGDs) following surgical procedures for head or neck cancer. Exploratory, complementary mixed methods. Otolaryngology surgical inpatient unit of an urban teaching hospital. 10 purposively selected patients with a mean age of 57.1 years (SD = 12.8 years) and moderately severe illness (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score mean = 27.1 + 13.2) who had SGDs in their hospital rooms for 9.1 + 6.2 days. Observation, interviews, questionnaires, and clinical record review. Communication methods, communication content, SGD use, communication quality (i.e., ease and user satisfaction), barriers to SGD use, and patient clinical characteristics. SGDs were used in message construction in 8 (17%) out of 48 total observed communication events. Writing (31%) and nonverbal communication (46%) were the most frequently observed primary methods of communication used by patients with head and neck cancer postoperatively. Five patients demonstrated occasional SGD use with or without cuing, and one used the SGD as the dominant communication method. Ease of Communication Scale scores showed only slightly less difficulty with communication when compared to a historic control group. Patients initiated communications more often when SGDs were used in message construction. Poor device positioning, staff unfamiliarity with SGDs, and patient preference and ability for writing were barriers to SGD use. Although writing and making gestures were the most common communication methods, SGDs were used successfully by selected patients and may be particularly beneficial for constructing complex messages during conversation. SGDs may be an appropriate assistive communication strategy for postoperative patients with head and neck cancer. Nurses can facilitate effective patient communication with SGDs by cuing patients on device options and positioning SGDs within easy reach.

Use of Speech-Generating Devices: In Support of Natural Speech

One of the most frequently cited concerns from parents, teachers, and other caregivers, upon hearing a recommendation for the use of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is, 'Will its use interfere with natural speech?' Reports of positive effects of AAC use, particularly that of speech output, are increasingly available, whereas evidence to support negative consequences of AAC use has not been widely reported. In this paper, possible explanations for increases in natural speech production associated with AAC use are explored, along with a discussion of clinical implications and future research.

Issues Affecting Staff Enhancement of Speech-Generating Device Use Among People with Severe Cognitive Disabilities

This paper focuses on the role of human service staff when supporting individuals with severe disabilities who use speech-generating devices (SGDs) for functional communication. Following a brief overview of research that demonstrates the efficacy of SGDs within this group, a summary is provided of skills staff require to help ensure that individuals with severe disabilities have opportunities to use SGDs in effective ways. A competency- and performance-based training model (based on adult learning principles) which has evolved through applied research is discussed in relation to providing relevant skills training. An applied research-based model for supervising and monitoring staff performance of SGD-related duties and responsibilities is also presented. Directions for future research, aimed at further enhancing the capacity of human service personnel to support people with severe cognitive disabilities in using SGDs, are noted.