Caregiver and child perspectives of wellbeing in school-age children with childhood apraxia of speech.

PURPOSE: Childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) is a communication deficit that impacts a child's overall quality of life, including their academic and social interactions, yet few studies have investigated the impact from the child's perspective. Using The World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework, we examined the children's and caregivers' perspectives on the impact of CAS on their overall wellbeing. METHOD: Survey data were collected from 32 child-caregiver dyads for children ages 9-17 years with CAS. Items elicited responses along a 5-point scale to examine the perceived impact of children's speech impairments using the framework, including impact on communication, interpersonal interactions/relationships, and major life events. RESULT: Results from non-parametric statistical analyses revealed: (a) caregivers reported a significantly greater impact than children across individual ICF domains; (b) child responses were not significantly correlated with their caregiver's responses or with the child's age, gender, or severity indicators; and (c) both caregivers and children indicated the domain of communication was impacted more than other domains. CONCLUSION: Results suggest a potential disconnect in the perceived impact of CAS between the caregiver and child. Recommendations include facilitating a dialogue between the child-caregiver dyad and considering treatment goals that address wellbeing.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Treatment Distribution and Biofeedback Effects on Speech Production in School-Age Children With Apraxia of Speech.

PURPOSE: This study examines how ultrasound biofeedback and intensive treatment distribution affect speech sound generalization during an evidence-based treatment, Speech Motor Chaining, for children with persisting speech errors associated with childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). METHOD: In a 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial, children ages 9-17 years meeting CAS criteria were randomized to receive (a) a distributed treatment (20 sessions twice weekly over 10 weeks) or intensive treatment (20 hr in 5 weeks, with 10 hr in Week 1) and (b) treatment with or without biofeedback. Due to the COVID pandemic, some participants were randomized to distributed/intensive telepractice treatment only. The primary outcome was percent target sounds correct on untreated phrases (i.e., generalization) at the 10-week time point. More than 50,000 narrow phonetic transcriptions were analyzed. RESULTS: Forty-eight participants completed treatment. Intensive treatment significantly increased generalization at all time points. The effect of biofeedback was significant at 5 weeks from the start of treatment but not significant at the primary 10-week time point. However, when comparing each group immediately after their 20 hr of treatment finished, generalization was significantly greater in intensive over distributed treatment and greater in ultrasound over no-ultrasound treatment (with a significant interaction favoring intensive treatment with ultrasound). Only the advantage of intensive treatment remained significant 5 weeks after groups finished treatment. There was no significant difference between face-to-face and telepractice modalities. CONCLUSIONS: When the number of treatment hours is fixed, an intensive schedule of Speech Motor Chaining facilitated greater improvement than a distributed schedule. Ultrasound biofeedback initially accelerated learning, but the benefits may dissipate as treatment continues or after it ends.