UK speech and language therapists' assessment of children's expressive language, and functional impairment and impact, following the CATALISE publications.

BACKGROUND: In 2016/17, the CATALISE Consortium published the results of a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study, representing agreement among professionals about the definition and process of identification of children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) (Bishop et al., 2016, 2017). The extent to which the current clinical practice of UK speech and language therapists (SLTs) reflects the CATALISE consensus statements is unknown. AIMS: To investigate how UK SLTs' expressive language assessment practices reflect the CATALISE documents' emphasis on the functional impairment and impact caused by DLD, by examining: whether multiple sources of assessment information are gathered; how standardised and non-standardised sources are combined in clinical decision-making, and how clinical observation and language sample analysis are utilised. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: An anonymous, online survey was carried out between August 2019 and January 2020. It was open to UK-based paediatric SLTs who assess children up to age 12 with unexplained difficulties using language. Questions probed different aspects of expressive language assessment which are referred to in the CATALISE consensus statements and supplementary comments, and asked about participants' familiarity with the CATALISE statements. Responses were analysed using simple descriptive statistics and content analysis. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 104 participants, from all four regions of the United Kingdom, working in a range of clinical settings with different levels of professional experience of DLD. The findings indicate that clinical assessment practices broadly align with the CATALISE statements. Although clinicians carry out standardised assessments more frequently than other types of assessment, they also gather information from other sources and use this alongside standardised test scores to inform clinical decisions. Clinical observation and language sample analysis are commonly utilised to evaluate functional impairment and impact, along with parent/carer/teacher and child report. However, asking about the child's own perspective could be more widely utilised. The findings also highlight a lack of familiarity with the details of the CATALISE documents among two thirds of the participants. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Assessment practices broadly align with the CATALISE statements, but there is a need for greater clarity regarding terminology and the assessment of functional language impairment and impact. This research should prompt discussion in the profession about how to further develop and adopt expressive language assessment practices which reflect the CATALISE consensus and support effective assessment. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject The CATALISE consortium documents on Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) were published in 2016/17. The extent to which expressive language assessment practice in the United Kingdom reflects the new definition and statements on assessment has not previously been investigated. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This survey indicates that speech and language therapists in the United Kingdom assessing children for DLD mostly balance standardised language test scores with other sources of information in clinical decision-making, and utilise clinical observation and language sample analysis to consider functional impairment and the impact of the language disorder. However, important questions are raised regarding the robustness and objectivity with which these key parameters are currently defined and evaluated. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Clinicians, individually and at service level, are encouraged to reflect on their assessment of functional impairment and the impact of language disorder and to take steps to incorporate this where necessary. Professional guidance and clinical tools to facilitate robust, objective assessment would support clinical practice that aligns with expert consensus.

Making the case for the collection of a minimal dataset for children with speech sound disorder.

BACKGROUND: NHS case note data are a potential source of practice-based evidence which could be used to investigate the effectiveness of different interventions for individuals with a range of speech, language and communication needs. Consistency in pre- and post-intervention data as well as the collection of relevant variables would need to be demonstrated as a precursor to adopting this approach in future investigations of speech and language therapy intervention. AIMS: To explore whether routine clinical data collection for children with speech sound disorder (SSD) could be a potential source for examining the effectiveness of intervention(s). METHODS & PROCEDURES: We examined case notes from three UK NHS services, reviewing 174 sets of case notes and 234 blocks of therapy provided for school-age children with SSD. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: We found there was significant variation in pre- and post-intervention data and variables collected by the services. The assessment data available in the case notes across all sites were insufficient to be used to compare the effectiveness of different interventions. Specific issues included lack of consistent reporting of pre- and post-intervention data, and use of a variety of both formal and informal assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The case notes reviewed were from three sites and may not represent wider clinical practice, nevertheless the findings suggest the sample explored indicates the need for more consistent and contemporaneous collection of data for children with SSD to facilitate the investigation of different interventions in practice. Researchers should work with the clinical community to determine a minimal dataset that includes a core outcome set and potential variables. This should be feasible to collect in clinical practice and provide a dataset for future investigations of clinically relevant research questions. This would provide an invaluable resource to the clinical academic and research communities enabling research questions to be addressed that have the potential to lead to improved outcomes and more cost-effective services. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject While there is some evidence for the efficacy of therapy for children with SSD, studies typically focus on very specific populations who meet strict selection criteria and take place in university clinics or laboratory-style settings which do not reflect typical clinical practice in the UK and elsewhere. An alternative approach to investigating the effectiveness of interventions would be to use NHS case note data. It is not clear from the existing literature whether case note data are sufficiently robust to facilitate such an analysis. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study found that case note data, in particular assessment data, were highly variable across services and would be insufficient to compare different interventions for this population. Agreement on what should be included in a minimal dataset for children with SSD is required to maximize the potential for NHS clinical case notes to become a resource for future research. What are the actual or potential clinical implications of this work? This study indicates that current clinical practice in SLT for children with SSD is inconsistent with regards to the reporting of pre- and post-intervention assessment data and other important variables in case notes. We make the case for agreeing a minimal dataset with a need for clinicians to work with researchers to determine core outcomes and additional relevant data, which can be feasibly collected in clinical practice.

Practice makes perfect? The pedagogic value of online independent phonetic transcription practice for speech and language therapy students.

Accuracy of phonetic transcription is a core skill for speech and language therapists (SLTs) worldwide (Howard & Heselwood, 2002). The current study investigates the value of weekly independent online phonetic transcription tasks to support development of this skill in year one SLT students. Using a mixed methods observational design, students enrolled in a year one phonetics module completed 10 weekly homework activities in phonetic transcription on a stand-alone tutorial site (WebFon (Bates, Matthews & Eagles, 2010)) and 5 weekly online quizzes (the 'Ulster Set' (Titterington, unpublished)). Student engagement with WebFon was measured in terms of the number of responses made to 'sparks' on the University's Virtual Learning Environment Discussion Board. Measures of phonetic transcription accuracy were obtained for the 'Ulster Set' and for a stand-alone piece of coursework at the end of the module. Qualitative feedback about experience with the online learning was gathered via questionnaire. A positive significant association was found between student engagement with WebFon and performance in the 'Ulster Set', and between performance in the 'Ulster Set' and final coursework. Students valued both online independent learning resources as each supported different learning needs. However, student compliance with WebFon was significantly lower than with the 'Ulster Set'. Motivators and inhibitors to engagement with the online resources were investigated identifying what best maximised engagement. These results indicate that while 'independent' online learning can support development of phonetic transcription skills, the activities must be carefully managed and constructively aligned to assessment providing the level of valance necessary to ensure effective engagement.