Facilitated communication and authorship: a systematic review

Touch may reduce cognitive load during assisted typing by individuals with developmental disabilities

Many techniques have attempted to provide physical support to ease the execution of a typing task by individuals with developmental disabilities (DD). These techniques have been controversial due to concerns that the support provider's touch can influence the typed content. The most common interpretation of assisted typing as an ideomotor phenomenon has been qualified recently by studies showing that users with DD make identifiable contributions to the process. This paper suggests a neurophysiological pathway by which touch could lower the cognitive load of seated typing by people with DD. The required sensorimotor processes (stabilizing posture and planning and executing manual reaching movements) and cognitive operations (generating and transcribing linguistic material) place concurrent demands on cognitive resources, particularly executive function (EF). A range of developmental disabilities are characterized by deficits in sensorimotor and EF capacity. As light touch has been shown to facilitate postural coordination, it is proposed that a facilitator's touch could assist the seated typist with sensorimotor and EF deficits by reducing their sensorimotor workload and thereby freeing up shared cognitive resources for the linguistic elements of the task. This is the first theoretical framework for understanding how a facilitator's touch may assist individuals with DD to contribute linguistic content during touch-assisted typing.

Perspective: Presuming Autistic Communication Competence and Reframing Facilitated Communication

Debate surrounding the validity of the method of supported typing known as facilitated communication (FC) has been continuous since its inception in the 1990s. Views are polarized on whether FC can be considered an authenticated method for use by people with complex communication needs (CCN) or significant challenges in speech, language, and communication. This perspective article presents an analysis of the research arguing for—and against—the use of FC, combined with the lived experience knowledge of autistic adults who utilize FC, to rehabilitate its current standing as discredited and unevidenced. By considering extant qualitative and quantitative studies, as well as personal accounts of the use of this particular Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) method, the authors argue that the current dismissal of FC is rooted in ableist and outdated approaches. FC research should be reconsidered and reconducted using current best practice autism research approaches, including coproduction and a presumption of autistic communication competence, to assess its validity as a potential AAC method for autistic individuals.

Augmentative and Alternative Communication for Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disability: A Mega-Review of the Literature

Establishing evidence- and research-based practices relies upon research synthesis of individual studies in reviews and meta analyses. Further summarizing scientific evidence about a specific topic by synthesizing reviews is an area of need to determine practices that have a strong evidence base and to identify areas of methodological weakness and gaps in the literature. A mega-review of literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses on interventions using aided augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) interventions for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities from 2000 to mid-2020 was conducted. Participant and interventionist demographics, interventions, settings, outcomes, and recommendations of each review were reported and summarized. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews Revised (AMSTAR 2; Shea et al., 2017) was used to examine the methodological rigor of 84 included reviews. Over the past 20 years, published reviews have increased slightly in methodological rigor but demonstrate a number of methodological weaknesses that detract from the strength of evidence for AAC interventions with this population. Suggestions for improving the methodological rigor of literature reviews and areas for future research specific to AAC interventions are discussed.

Is speech and language therapy effective at improving the communication of adults with intellectual disabilities?: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) experience speech, language and communication difficulties which are associated with poor physical and mental health outcomes. Speech and language therapy (SLT) interventions are an important way to address these communication difficulties, yet there is limited available evidence to provide information about the effectiveness of the different approaches used for this heterogeneous group.

AIMS

To review the evidence available for the effectiveness of SLT interventions aimed at improving communication for adults with ID.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A systematic search across relevant databases was performed. Information on methodological details of each relevant study, along with descriptions of the SLT interventions employed, were extracted and the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT) was used to assess quality. Findings were discussed in a narrative synthesis grouped by target communication skill.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

A total of 10 relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. These were predominantly interventions aimed directly at adults with ID to improve speech, increase augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) use and develop interaction skills, with one study addressing work with carers. The included studies were all rated as low quality. There is weak preliminary evidence that SLT input can improve the communication skills of adults with ID.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

There is insufficient evidence to draw strong conclusions about the effectiveness of SLT in this population. Further high-level evidence across speech, language and communication domains is urgently needed. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject There is limited evidence for community health interventions used with adults with ID. Previous reviews of SLT interventions found a lack of evidence base for this population. Some areas of SLT practice such as AAC have demonstrated potential benefits and other areas including speech work, social communication skills and training for communication partners have some evidence base for children with ID but there is currently insufficient evidence for adults with ID. What this paper adds to existing knowledge The study systematically reviews the current evidence base available when considering the effectiveness of SLT intervention for adults with ID. It provides weak evidence to suggest SLT intervention can improve communication in this population and highlights the need for clinically relevant, robustly designed studies to be undertaken in this field. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The lack of high-quality studies with sufficient power to draw conclusions about effectiveness means SLTs are not able to base their intervention choices on firm evidence. There is an urgent need to conduct robust research into the effectiveness of SLT interventions for adults with ID.

Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry

Facilitated communication (FC) belongs to augmentative and alternative methods of communication. Currently, FC is very rarely and unofficially used with people suffering from verbal/communicative disorders or neurodevelopmental disorders such as intellectual deficiency or autism spectrum disorder (ASD). FC consists of physical support exerted by a facilitator at the hand/wrist/forearm/elbow of a patient/participant, aimed at helping him/her to point at pictures/words, and sometimes to type letters/words on a keyboard. Given most of (but not all) validation studies using control procedures failed to confirm that ASD participants themselves were authoring the messages via FC, this method has been massively disputed and rejected. However, firm and definitive conclusions for/against the validity of FC requires more robust demonstrations, particularly when considering the motor participation of both protagonists. We present here a case report investigating the motor contribution of both protagonists during a typing process using the non-invasive technique of accelerometry. A 17-year-old boy diagnosed with congenital deafness, ASD, and developmental delay, and his facilitator, were equipped with small accelerometers fixed on their index finger, aimed at transforming index acceleration along the three spatial axes into electric signals. Typing on a PC keyboard was performed under three support conditions: hand support, forearm support, elbow support, plus a solo-typing condition. Accelerometric signals and video data were recorded during four FC sessions. We measured and compared the typing speed, the number/percentage of acceleration peaks produced by the participant or by the facilitator first, and those of "signal under detection threshold" in the facilitator, the time offset between acceleration peaks of both protagonists, and the difference of the amount of acceleration between them, across the different support conditions. Results indicate that in the hand support, most of the time, acceleration motions of the participant's index finger preceded those of the facilitator's index finger. Then, the more distal the physical support (i.e., farer from the participant's hand), the slower the speed of typing, the higher the percentage of "signal under detection threshold" in the facilitator, the bigger the motor contribution from the participant. Altogether, in all the support conditions, the participant's authorship or, at least, co-authorship on the messages seems warranted. Finally, accelerometry seems relevant to objectivize authorship or co-authorship in FC and delineate various forms of FC.

Identification, Evaluation, and Management of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder with reported prevalence in the United States of 1 in 59 children (approximately 1.7%). Core deficits are identified in 2 domains: social communication/interaction and restrictive, repetitive patterns of behavior. Children and youth with ASD have service needs in behavioral, educational, health, leisure, family support, and other areas. Standardized screening for ASD at 18 and 24 months of age with ongoing developmental surveillance continues to be recommended in primary care (although it may be performed in other settings), because ASD is common, can be diagnosed as young as 18 months of age, and has evidenced-based interventions that may improve function. More accurate and culturally sensitive screening approaches are needed. Primary care providers should be familiar with the diagnostic criteria for ASD, appropriate etiologic evaluation, and co-occurring medical and behavioral conditions (such as disorders of sleep and feeding, gastrointestinal tract symptoms, obesity, seizures, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, and wandering) that affect the child's function and quality of life. There is an increasing evidence base to support behavioral and other interventions to address specific skills and symptoms. Shared decision making calls for collaboration with families in evaluation and choice of interventions.  This single clinical report updates the 2007 American Academy of Pediatrics clinical reports on the evaluation and treatment of ASD in one publication with an online table of contents and section view available through the American Academy of Pediatrics Gateway to help the reader identify topic areas within the report.

Development of a new high sensitivity mechanical switch for augmentative and alternative communication access in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

BACKGROUND

People with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (PwALS) in the advanced phase are critically affected by an almost total loss of mobility and severe communication problems. Scanning access based on the patient's interaction with a sensor (or switch) that intercepts even a weak body movement is a valid communication aid. However, its use becomes limited with the progressive decline of residual movements. To overcome this problem, we designed a new sensor, the Lever Magnetic-spring Mechanical Switch (LeMMS), allowing repeated activation/release cycles requiring a very small activation force.

METHODS

The LeMMS was applied and validated in a group of 20 PwALS in an advanced stage of disease. All subjects were regular users of communication aids employing other sensors, but which they could no longer operate their sensors (different from LeMMS). Patients were assessed at baseline (t0) and after one (t1), 6 (t2) and 12 (t3) months. Assessment at t0 included administration of standardized clinical scales, the Click-Test-30 counting the maximum number of LeMMS activations in 30 s, and thumb/fingers strength assessment with the Kendall scale. The QUEST 2.0-Dev questionnaire was administered at t1. Some use-related information and the Click-Test-30 were collected at t1, t2 and t3.

RESULTS

After one training session, all patients could operate the LeMMS with minimal residual movement of one finger. At t1, they used it on average 5.45 h/day. The mean score of the QUEST 2.0-Dev was 4.63, suggesting strong satisfaction with the LeMMS. Regarding Click-Test-30 scores, no significant difference was found between t0 and t1, but performance at t2 and t3 declined significantly (p < 0.005 vs. t0). At t3, 9/20 patients were still able to use their communication aid.

CONCLUSIONS

This new switch sensor can enable PwALS to use their communication aids for a prolonged time even in the advanced phase of disease. It is easy to use, reliable and cheap, thus representing an intermediate alternative to more sophisticated and costly devices.

Whose words are these? Statements derived from Facilitated Communication and Rapid Prompting Method undermine the credibility of Jaswal & Akhtar's social motivation hypotheses

Jaswal & Akhtar provide several quotes ostensibly from people with autism but obtained via the discredited techniques of Facilitated Communication and the Rapid Prompting Method, and they do not acknowledge the use of these techniques. As a result, their argument is substantially less convincing than they assert, and the article lacks transparency.

Toward a Phenomenological Account of Embodied Subjectivity in Autism

Sensorimotor research is currently challenging the dominant understanding of autism as a deficit in the cognitive ability to 'mindread'. This marks an emerging shift in autism research from a focus on the structure and processes of the mind to a focus on autistic behavior as grounded in the body. Contemporary researchers in sensorimotor differences in autism call for a reconciliation between the scientific understanding of autism and the first-person experience of autistic individuals. I argue that fulfilling this ambition requires a phenomenological understanding of the body as it presents itself in ordinary experience, namely as the subject of experience rather than a physical object. On this basis, I investigate how the phenomenology of Maurice Merleau-Ponty can be employed as a frame of understanding for bodily experience in autism. Through a phenomenological analysis of Tito Mukhopadhyay's autobiographical work, How can I talk if my lips don't move (2009), I illustrate the relevance and potential of phenomenological philosophy in autism research, arguing that this approach enables a deeper understanding of bodily and subjective experiences related to autism.

Evaluating Kupferstein’s claims of the relationship of behavioral intervention to PTSS for individuals with autism

Purpose

Kupferstein (2018) surveyed 460 respondents and found that 46 percent of respondents met the diagnostic threshold for posttraumatic stress disorder after exposure to applied-behavior-analysis-based intervention. The purpose of this paper is to provide an evaluation a critical analysis of Kupferstein (2018) including the experimental methods and discussion of the results.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors evaluated the Kupferstein’s methodological rigor with respect to the use of hypothesis testing, use of indirect measures, selection of respondents, ambiguity in definitions, measurement system, and framing of the experimental question when conducting the correlational analysis in addition to Kupferstein’s analysis and discussion of the results.

Findings

Based upon the analysis, Kupferstein’s results should be viewed with extreme caution due to several methodological and conceptual flaws including, but not limited to, leading questions used within a non-validated survey, failure to confirm diagnosis, and incomplete description of interventions.

Originality/value

It is the authors’ hope that this analysis provides caregivers, clinicians, and service providers with a scientific lens which will useful in viewing the limitations and methodological flaws of Kupferstein.

Augmentative and Alternative Communication – Scoping Review / Unterstützte Kommunikation – Scoping Review

Introduction

The effective use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication is challenging, not only for persons with complex communication needs, but also for their significant others. There is a need, therefore, for interprofessional collaboration in order to effectively assess, provide, and evaluate services.

Aim

The aim of this scoping review was to summarize current evidence in the field of Augmentative and Alternative Communication and reveal the demands for further research.

Method

We searched in the electronic databases Pubmed, AMED, and CINAHL using following keywords child*, disability, cerebral palsy, augmentative and alternative communication, intervention, and therapy to identify relevant literature. We summarised the content of the included studies.

Results

We included 16 literature reviews and 36 studies in this review. The 36 studies included 11 intervention studies, 20 descriptive studies, two experimental studies, and three studies evaluating assessments. Most of the studies were focussing on children with cerebral palsy and autism in the contexts of home, hospital, and primary school. There were no intervention studies, focusing on secondary and/or tertiary level of education or work. Moreover, we have not found any evidence from German speaking Europe.

Conclusion

In order to support the use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication and to enable participation of persons with complex communication needs, various endeavours are needed: in the practice of care settings interprofessional collaboration is required. Further research is needed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, focussing on youth and the contexts of secondary and/or tertiary education or work, or on assessments.

A systematic review of the barriers and facilitators to the provision and use of low-tech and unaided AAC systems for people with complex communication needs and their families

PURPOSE

Speech-language pathologists may introduce augmentative or alternative communication (AAC) systems to people who are unable to use speech for everyday communication. Despite the benefits of AAC systems, they are significantly underutilized by the people with complex communication needs. The current review aimed to synthesize the barriers and facilitators to the provision and use of low-tech and unaided AAC systems.  Materials and methods: Relevant literature was identified via a systematic search strategy. Included articles (n = 43) were evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Qualitative framework analysis was then completed with reference to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF).  Results and conclusion: Most barriers and facilitators were coded as contextual factors within the ICF. Of most prominence were environmental factors, including attitudes of and supports provided by professionals, family members, and the society at large. Themes were also identified which related to the personal factors, including the user's own attitude, socioeconomic status, and culture. Beyond these contextual factors, the remaining codes related to body functions such as cognition and movement. There are numerous barriers to the provision and use of low-tech and unaided AAC systems, which may contribute to the inadequate use of these systems by people with complex communication needs. Suggestions for reducing these barriers are presented with regards to the person with complex communication needs, their family, and the professionals involved in their care. Implications for Rehabilitation AAC systems can reduce participation restrictions for people with complex communication needs. The provision and use of AAC systems is influenced by environmental factors, personal factors, and features of a person's body function. SLPs may need to collaborate with a large multidisciplinary team to successfully introduce AAC systems. SLP, teaching, and nursing students require theoretical and practical experience in AAC throughout their training to enable the provision and use of these systems.

Parent-mediated communication interventions for improving the communication skills of preschool children with non-progressive motor disorders

BACKGROUND

Children with motor disorders can have difficulties in producing accurate and consistent movements for speech, gesture or facial expression (or a combination of these), making their communication difficult to understand. Parents may be offered training to help recognise and interpret their child's signals and to stimulate their children's development of new communication skills.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of parent-mediated communication interventions, compared to no intervention, treatment as usual or clinician-mediated interventions, for improving the communication skills of preschool children up to five years of age who have non-progressive motor disorders.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, 12 other databases and three trials registers in July 2017. We also searched the reference lists of relevant papers and reviews, and contacted experts working in the field to find unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that used randomised or quasi-randomised designs; compared a parent-mediated communication intervention with no treatment, treatment as usual or clinician-mediated therapy; and included children with non-progressive motor disorders up to five years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included two randomised controlled trials involving 38 children (20 boys, 18 girls), aged 15 to 96 months, and their mothers. All children had developmental disabilities; 10 had motor disorders, but it was unclear if these motor disorders affected their gestural, vocal or verbal communication. Mothers attended eight group training sessions over 11 to 12 weeks and received two or three home visits. Outcomes were assessed immediately after training. We found no report of longer-term follow-up. One study took place at an intervention centre in Canada and the other in South Korea.Both studies recruited small numbers of participants from single centres. Since it is not possible to blind participants attending or therapists providing training to group allocation, we considered both studies to be at high risk of performance bias. We also rated one study at high risk of attrition bias, and both studies at low risk of reporting bias.There was very low-quality evidence for all outcomes assessed. There was no evidence of an effect of training for children's initiation of conversation or engagement in joint attention during interaction with their mothers. Mothers who received training became more responsive to their children's communication, but there were no differences in the extent to which they controlled conversation by directing their children. Missing data meant that we were unable to evaluate the effects of training on children's frequency of communication, frequency of spoken language in conversation, speech production, or receptive or expressive language development. There were no effects on maternal stress. We found no reports of the effects of parent training on children's use of individual communication skills, such as asking questions or providing information, on their generic participation or adverse outcomes. Neither did we find reports of mothers' satisfaction with treatment, its acceptability or their compliance with it.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is only limited, very low quality evidence that parent-mediated communication interventions may be associated with improvements in interaction between mothers and their preschool children who have motor disorders. The indirectness of the study samples and high risk of bias in the included the studies significantly limits our confidence in the evidence, as do issues with study design and lack of detail in results. It is not clear if training has been tested with children whose motor disorders limit the consistency and accuracy of movements underpinning spoken or gestural communication. Some speech and language therapists currently provide communication training for parents. Further research, with larger numbers of children whose movement disorders affect their speech and gestures, coupled with detailed reporting of children's baseline skills, is needed to test whether communication training for parents can help them to promote the communication development of their young children with movement disorders.

Preparing Our Future Helping Professionals to Become Critical Thinkers: A Tutorial

Critical thinking is increasingly recognized as an essential knowledge and skill for the helping professions. Yet, our pedagogical literature has provided infrequent guidance on how instructors can help students to understand what “critical thinking” means or how it might contribute to their professional lives. Therefore, the purpose of this tutorial is to provide guidelines on how instructors might teach future practitioners to become critical thinkers. The main topics address an instructional definition of critical thinking, the basic knowledge and skills that comprise critical thinking, a broad view of instructional approaches, and a summary of developmental milestones of adult critical thinkers. Specific teaching strategies from instructors who have hands-on experience with guiding their students to become critical thinkers are included.

The role of augmentative and alternative communication for children with autism: current status and future trends

BACKGROUND

Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) interventions are used for children with autism, often as stand-alone communication interventions for those who are minimally verbal. Our aim was to synthesize the evidence for AAC interventions for children (up to 21 years), and then consider the role of AAC within established, comprehensive, evidence-based autism interventions targeting learning across multiple developmental domains.

DESIGN

We completed a systematic search of three databases (OVID Medline, PsycINFO, ERIC) as well as forward citation and hand searches to identify systematic reviews of AAC intervention efficacy research including children with autism, published between 2000 and March 2016 in peer-reviewed journals. Data pertaining to the quality indicators of included studies, effect sizes for intervention outcomes, and evidence for effectiveness were extracted for descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

The search yielded 17 systematic reviews. Most provided indicators of research quality for included studies, of which only relatively few provided conclusive results. Communication targets tended to be focused on teaching children to make requests. Still, effect size measures for included studies indicated that AAC was effective to highly effective.

CONCLUSION

There is growing evidence for the potential benefits of AAC for children with autism, but there is a need for more well-designed studies and broader, targeted outcomes. Furthermore, a lack of evidence for the role of AAC within comprehensive intervention programs may account for a tendency by autism researchers and practitioners to neglect this intervention. Attempts to compare evidence for AAC with other interventions for children with autism, including those in which the use of AAC is delayed or excluded in pursuit of speech-only communication, must take into account the needs of children with the most significant learning needs. These children pose the greatest challenges to achieving large and consistent intervention effects, yet stand to gain the most from AAC interventions.

Maintaining Professional Relationships in an Interdisciplinary Setting: Strategies for Navigating Nonbehavioral Treatment Recommendations for Individuals with Autism

Due to an increase in research and clinical application of behavior analysis with individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), one setting a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) may work within is an interdisciplinary setting, where multiple disciplines collaborate to improve the outcomes of individuals with ASD. In some cases, nonbehavioral colleagues could recommend nonbehavioral treatments, setting the occasion for the BCBA to offer an alternative treatment to or question the nonbehavioral treatment. However, excessive questioning or critiques of nonbehavioral treatments by the BCBA may unintentionally erode professional relationships between the BCBA and their nonbehavioral colleagues. Because an erosion of professional relationships may occur when a BCBA questions a nonbehavioral treatment, a decision-making model for determining whether or not the proposed nonbehavioral treatment is worth addressing may be useful. The purpose of this paper is to outline such a decision-making model in order to assist the BCBA in assessing nonbehavioral treatments while maintaining an ethical balance between professional relationships and the well-being and safety of the individual with ASD. Such a model could assist the BCBA in becoming familiar with the proposed treatment, understanding the perspective of the nonbehavioral colleague and assessing the negative impacts the treatment could have on the individual with ASD. With this information, the BCBA will be in a better position to decide whether or not addressing the nonbehavioral treatment is worth the possibility of eroding a professional relationship.