Parents' perceptions on speech therapy delivery models in children with a cleft palate: A mixed methods study

"The Decision to End Speech Therapy Brought More Peace and Tranquility Into Our Family": Exploring Speech-Related Treatment Fatigue and Dropout in Parents and Children With a Cleft Palate

PURPOSE

Treatment fatigue is a complex, multidimensional, multicausal, and subjective phenomenon that is not yet well explored and understood in the area of speech therapy. The purpose of this study was to investigate speech-related treatment fatigue and speech treatment dropout in parents and children with a cleft (lip and) palate receiving or having received speech treatment for cleft-related articulation disorders.

METHOD

Thirteen participants were included in this study (n = seven parents with a median age of 40 years and n = six children with a median age of 10 years). Qualitative semistructured interviews were conducted separately with parents and children to investigate their experiences with cleft speech treatment. An inductive thematic approach was used to analyze the data and construct different themes. Rigor of the data was verified by conducting an investigator triangulation and by performing member checks.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The analyses of the interviews yielded three major themes of importance to the children and their parents: (a) physical symptoms of treatment fatigue, (b) psychological symptoms of treatment fatigue, and (c) from treatment fatigue to treatment dropout. Physical symptoms of treatment fatigue were mainly related to transportation burden. On a psychological level, speech treatment may potentially lead to a cognitive-emotional overload. These feelings are primarily related to the practical issue of scheduling required treatment sessions in the family agenda. The decision to discontinue speech treatment was reported to be multifactorial. In this decision-making process, data suggested that the child's perspective must be heard more.

'Sometimes I feel sad': A qualitative study on children's perceptions with cleft palate speech and language therapy

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based speech therapy involves the integration of (1) the scientific evidence for therapy with (2) the perspectives of clinicians concerning therapy and (3) the perspectives of patients about therapy. The cleft literature has already paid attention to the first two cornerstones of evidence-based speech therapy. Much less is known about how children perceive cleft speech therapy.

AIMS

The purpose of the current qualitative study was to investigate the perceptions, emotions and expectations of Flemish-speaking Dutch children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP ± L), aged 5-12 years, with regard to the speech therapy they receive. In this study, a focus was made on speech therapy to eliminate compensatory cleft speech errors.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Six children with a CP ± L, aged between 5 and 12 years, were included in this study. Child-friendly semi-structured interviews were conducted using a participatory, art-based qualitative approach. This means that the 'play and puppets technique' and 'draw-write and photo-elicitation technique' were used to guide the children through the interviews. Data derived from these interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Trustworthiness of the data was achieved by applying researcher triangulation, negative case analysis and an audit trail.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Analyses of the interviews revealed three major themes of importance to the children: (1) treatment values, (2) treatment practices and (3) treatment outcomes. Each theme was divided into different subthemes. The theme 'treatment values' consisted of the subthemes expectations and emotions around therapy and interference with daily living. Information flow, therapy content, confirmation and rewards, parents' attendance, therapy intensity, and homework were subthemes of the major theme 'treatment practices'. The theme 'treatment outcomes' was divided into two subthemes, namely speech improvement and peers' reactions.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Most children had positive attitudes towards speech therapy: it was 'something they liked' and 'something fun'. If children had negative attitudes they were related to having a fear of making mistakes during therapy. Children had clear expectations of the purpose of speech therapy. Speech therapy should 'help' improve their speech and make it more understandable to others. The children in this sample made some suggestions to decrease the experienced burden related to speech therapy. The results of this study will help to better tailor speech therapy programmes to the needs and experiences of children with a CP ± L.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Evidence-based speech therapy involves the integration of (1) the scientific evidence for therapy with (2) the perspectives of clinicians concerning therapy and (3) the perspectives of patients and their families about therapy. The cleft literature has already paid attention to the first two cornerstones of evidence-based speech therapy. Different studies investigated the perspectives of SLPs and parents with regard to cleft palate speech therapy. However, much less is known about the children's own experiences with and perceptions around this speech therapy. What this study adds to existing knowledge This study used a qualitative research design to investigate the perceptions, emotions and expectations of children with a cleft (lip and) palate, aged 5-12 years, with regard to the speech therapy they receive. Speech therapy needed to focus on the elimination of compensatory speech errors. This study provides knowledge on the speech therapy-related experiences of children with a cleft palate. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Children in this sample made some concrete suggestions to decrease the experienced burden related to cleft speech therapy, for example, integration of school work during therapy sessions and practising on the level of spontaneous speech. The results of this study help us to better tailor speech therapy programmes to the needs and experiences of children with a CP ± L.

The retrospective acceptability of high intensity versus low intensity speech intervention in children with a cleft palate: A qualitative study from the parents' point of view using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability

BACKGROUND

Increasing attention is paid to the effectiveness of high-intensity speech intervention in children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP±L). It is, however, unknown if high-intensity intervention is acceptable to the intervention recipients. Parents have an integral role in supporting their children with intervention highlighting the importance of intervention acceptability to parents.

AIMS

To compare the retrospective acceptability of high-intensity speech intervention (10 1-hr speech therapy sessions divided over 2 weeks) with the retrospective acceptability of low-intensity speech intervention (10 1-hr speech therapy sessions divided over 10 weeks) for children with a CP±L from the parents' point of view.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Twelve parents of 12 children, aged 6-0 years who received high-intensity speech intervention (n = 6) or low-intensity speech intervention (n = 6), were invited to participate in this study. Seven parents (n = 3 in the high-intensity group and n = 4 in the low-intensity group) agreed to participate (total response rate: 7/12, 58.33%). A qualitative study design using semi-structured interviews was applied. To investigate the retrospective acceptability of the two intervention intensities, deductive coding according to the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) was used.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

With regard to the TFA construct 'affective attitude', results demonstrated that parents had positive feelings about the provided speech intervention regardless of the intensity. Parents of children who received high-intensity speech intervention reported two specific benefits related to the high intervention intensity: (1) it improved their relationship with the speech-language pathologist and (2) it improved their child's ability to make self-corrections in his/her speech. Even though both high-intensive and low-intensity speech intervention were considered burdensome (TFA construct 'burden'), parents were less likely to drop out of high-intensity intervention because the total intervention period was kept short.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

In conclusion, high-intensity speech intervention seemed acceptable to parents. More positive codes were identified for some of the TFA constructs in the high-intensity intervention group than in the low-intensity intervention group. Considering that some parents doubted their self-efficacy to participate in high-intensity speech intervention, speech-language pathologists need to counsel them so that they can adhere to the high intervention intensity. Future studies should investigate whether high-intensity speech intervention is also acceptable to the children who receive the intervention and to the speech-language pathologists who deliver the intervention.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject Increasing attention is paid to the effectiveness of high-intensity speech intervention in children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP±L). Different quantitative studies have shown positive speech outcomes after high-intensity cleft speech intervention. Despite this increasing attention to high-intensity speech intervention, it is unknown whether high-intensity intervention is also acceptable to the intervention recipients. This study compared the retrospective acceptability of high-intensity speech intervention (10 1-hour speech therapy sessions divided over 2 weeks) with the retrospective acceptability of low-intensity speech intervention (10 1-hour speech therapy sessions divided over 10 weeks) in children with a CP±L from the parents' point of view. What this paper adds to existing knowledge More positive codes were identified for some of the TFA constructs in the high-intensity intervention group than in the low-intensity intervention group. Nevertheless, some parents doubted their self-efficacy to participate in high-intensity speech intervention. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The findings of this study forces us to reconsider the traditional cleft speech intervention delivery models which usually consist of low-intensity intervention. Speech-language pathologists need to counsel parents and so that they can adhere to the high intervention intensity.