Dataset Information

Remediating Residual Rhotic Errors With Traditional and Ultrasound-Enhanced Treatment: A Single-Case Experimental Study.

ABSTRACT: Purpose The aim of the study was to examine how ultrasound visual feedback (UVF) treatment impacts speech sound learning in children with residual speech errors affecting /?/. Method Twelve children, ages 9-14 years, received treatment for vocalic /?/ errors in a multiple-baseline across-subjects design comparing 8 sessions of UVF treatment and 8 sessions of traditional (no-biofeedback) treatment. All participants were exposed to both treatment conditions, with order counterbalanced across participants. To monitor progress, naïve listeners rated the accuracy of vocalic /?/ in untreated words. Results After the first 8 sessions, children who received UVF were judged to produce more accurate vocalic /?/ than those who received traditional treatment. After the second 8 sessions, within-participant comparisons revealed individual variation in treatment response. However, group-level comparisons revealed greater accuracy in children whose treatment order was UVF followed by traditional treatment versus children who received the reverse treatment order. Conclusion On average, 8 sessions of UVF were more effective than 8 sessions of traditional treatment for remediating vocalic /?/ errors. Better outcomes were also observed when UVF was provided in the early rather than later stages of learning. However, there remains a significant individual variation in response to UVF and traditional treatment, and larger group-level studies are needed. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.8206640.

SUBMITTER: Preston JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6802922 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Remediating Residual Rhotic Errors With Traditional and Ultrasound-Enhanced Treatment: A Single-Case Experimental Study.

Preston Jonathan L JL McAllister Tara T Phillips Emily E Boyce Suzanne S Tiede Mark M Kim Jackie Sihyun JS Whalen Douglas H DH

American journal of speech-language pathology 20190606 3

Purpose The aim of the study was to examine how ultrasound visual feedback (UVF) treatment impacts speech sound learning in children with residual speech errors affecting /ɹ/. Method Twelve children, ages 9-14 years, received treatment for vocalic /ɹ/ errors in a multiple-baseline across-subjects design comparing 8 sessions of UVF treatment and 8 sessions of traditional (no-biofeedback) treatment. All participants were exposed to both treatment conditions, with order counterbalanced across parti ...[more]

PMID: 31170355

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSpeech sound disorder in childhood poses a barrier to academic and social participation, with potentially lifelong consequences for educational and occupational outcomes. While most speech errors resolve by the late school-age years, between 2 and 5% of speakers exhibit residual speech errors (RSE) that persist through adolescence or even adulthood. Previous findings from small-scale studies suggest that interventions incorporating visual biofeedback can outperform traditional motor-based treatment approaches for children with RSE, but this question has not been investigated in a well-powered randomized controlled trial.Methods/designThis project, Correcting Residual Errors with Spectral, ULtrasound, Traditional Speech therapy Randomized Controlled Trial (C-RESULTS RCT), aims to treat 110 children in a parallel randomized controlled clinical trial comparing biofeedback and non-biofeedback interventions for RSE affecting the North American English rhotic sound /ɹ/. Eligible children will be American English speakers, aged 9-15 years, who exhibit RSE affecting /ɹ/ but otherwise show typical cognitive-linguistic and hearing abilities. Participants will be randomized, with stratification by site (Syracuse University or Montclair State University) and pre-treatment speech production ability, to receive either a motor-based treatment consistent with current best practices in speech therapy (40% of participants) or treatment incorporating visual biofeedback (60% of participants). Within the biofeedback condition, participants will be assigned in equal numbers to receive biofeedback in the form of a real-time visual display of the acoustic signal of speech or ultrasound imaging of the tongue during speech. The primary outcome measure will assess changes in the acoustics of children's production of /ɹ/ during treatment, while a secondary outcome measure will use blinded listeners to evaluate changes in the perceived accuracy of /ɹ/ production after the completion of all treatment. These measures will allow the treatment conditions to be compared with respect to both efficacy and efficiency.DiscussionBy conducting the first well-powered randomized controlled trial comparing treatment with and without biofeedback, this study aims to provide high-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions for children with RSE.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03737318, November 9, 2018.

Project description:Purpose Research comparing different biofeedback types could lead to individualized treatments for those with residual speech errors. This study examines within-treatment response to ultrasound and visual-acoustic biofeedback, as well as generalization to untrained words, for errors affecting the American English rhotic /ɹ/. We investigated whether some children demonstrated greater improvement in /ɹ/ during ultrasound or visual-acoustic biofeedback. Each participant received both biofeedback types. Individual predictors of treatment response (i.e., age, auditory-perceptual skill, oral somatosensory skill, and growth mindset) were also explored. Method Seven children ages 9-16 years with residual rhotic errors participated in 10 treatment visits. Each visit consisted of two conditions: 45 min of ultrasound biofeedback and 45 min of visual-acoustic biofeedback. The order of biofeedback conditions was randomized within a single-case experimental design. Acquisition of /ɹ/ was evaluated through acoustic measurements (normalized F3-F2 difference) of selected nonbiofeedback productions during practice. Generalization of /ɹ/ was evaluated through acoustic measurements and perceptual ratings of pretreatment/posttreatment probes. Results Five participants demonstrated acquisition of practiced words during the combined treatment package. Three participants demonstrated a clinically significant degree of generalization to untreated words on posttreatment probes. Randomization tests indicated one participant demonstrated a significant advantage for visual-acoustic over ultrasound biofeedback. Participants' auditory-perceptual acuity on an /ɹ/-/w/ identification task was identified as a possible correlate of generalization following treatment. Conclusions Most participants did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in acoustic productions between the ultrasound and visual-acoustic conditions, but one participant showed greater improvement in /ɹ/ during visual-acoustic biofeedback. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14881101.

Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to identify predictors of response to treatment for residual speech sound disorder (RSSD) affecting English rhotics. Progress was tracked during an initial phase of traditional motor-based treatment and a longer phase of treatment incorporating ultrasound biofeedback. Based on previous literature, we focused on baseline stimulability and sensory acuity as predictors of interest.MethodThirty-three individuals aged 9-15 years with residual distortions of /ɹ/ received a course of individual intervention comprising 1 week of intensive traditional treatment and 9 weeks of ultrasound biofeedback treatment. Stimulability for /ɹ/ was probed prior to treatment, after the traditional treatment phase, and after the end of all treatment. Accuracy of /ɹ/ production in each probe was assessed with an acoustic measure: normalized third formant (F3)-second formant (F2) distance. Model-based clustering analysis was applied to these acoustic measures to identify different average trajectories of progress over the course of treatment. The resulting clusters were compared with respect to acuity in auditory and somatosensory domains.ResultsAll but four individuals were judged to exhibit a clinically significant response to the combined course of treatment. Two major clusters were identified. The "low stimulability" cluster was characterized by very low accuracy at baseline, minimal response to traditional treatment, and strong response to ultrasound biofeedback. The "high stimulability" group was more accurate at baseline and made significant gains in both traditional and ultrasound biofeedback phases of treatment. The clusters did not differ with respect to sensory acuity.ConclusionsThis research accords with clinical intuition in finding that individuals who are more stimulable at baseline are more likely to respond to traditional intervention, whereas less stimulable individuals may derive greater relative benefit from biofeedback.Supplemental materialhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20422236.

Dataset Information

Remediating Residual Rhotic Errors With Traditional and Ultrasound-Enhanced Treatment: A Single-Case Experimental Study.

Publications

Remediating Residual Rhotic Errors With Traditional and Ultrasound-Enhanced Treatment: A Single-Case Experimental Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets