Debbie Sell1. 1. Department of Speech & Language Therapy, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, UK. selld@gosh.nhs.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Perceptual speech assessment is central to the evaluation of speech outcomes associated with cleft palate and velopharyngeal dysfunction. However, the complexity of this process is perhaps sometimes underestimated. AIMS: To draw together the many different strands in the complex process of perceptual speech assessment and analysis, and make recommendations for practice. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: This review examines issues such as data sampling, data collection/recording, archiving, the advantages and disadvantages of lay and specialist listeners, approaches to data analysis, reliability, and data interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: The need to capture meaningfully the sound of speech based on detailed phonetic analysis is argued. Also described are some of the differences in measuring speech for clinical, audit and research activities. Blind independent analysis of speech data by specialist therapists is recommended as the gold standard methodological approach when reporting audit and research outcomes. The requirement for ongoing training in listening skills for specialist therapists is advocated. The limitations of an impairment-based-only approach to measurement are also illustrated, indicating the need to develop outcome measures that incorporate more functional issues that affect quality of life.
BACKGROUND: Perceptual speech assessment is central to the evaluation of speech outcomes associated with cleft palate and velopharyngeal dysfunction. However, the complexity of this process is perhaps sometimes underestimated. AIMS: To draw together the many different strands in the complex process of perceptual speech assessment and analysis, and make recommendations for practice. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: This review examines issues such as data sampling, data collection/recording, archiving, the advantages and disadvantages of lay and specialist listeners, approaches to data analysis, reliability, and data interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: The need to capture meaningfully the sound of speech based on detailed phonetic analysis is argued. Also described are some of the differences in measuring speech for clinical, audit and research activities. Blind independent analysis of speech data by specialist therapists is recommended as the gold standard methodological approach when reporting audit and research outcomes. The requirement for ongoing training in listening skills for specialist therapists is advocated. The limitations of an impairment-based-only approach to measurement are also illustrated, indicating the need to develop outcome measures that incorporate more functional issues that affect quality of life.
Authors: Nicole M Kurnik; Erica M Weidler; Kari M Lien; Kelly N Cordero; Jessica L Williams; M'hamed Temkit; Stephen P Beals; Davinder J Singh; Thomas J Sitzman Journal: Cleft Palate Craniofac J Date: 2020-02-19
Authors: Maria Inês Pegoraro-Krook; Raquel Rodrigues Rosa; Homero C Aferri; Laura Katarine Félix de Andrade; Jeniffer de C R Dutka Journal: Braz J Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2020-07-21
Authors: Isabelle Francisca Petronella Maria Kappen; Dirk Bittermann; Laura Janssen; Gerhard Koendert Pieter Bittermann; Chantal Boonacker; Sarah Haverkamp; Hester de Wilde; Marise Van Der Heul; Tom Fjmc Specken; Ron Koole; Moshe Kon; Corstiaan Cornelis Breugem; Aebele Barber Mink van der Molen Journal: Arch Plast Surg Date: 2017-05-22
Authors: Hilary McCrary; Sarah Hatch Pollard; Vanessa Torrecillas; Leon Khong; Helene M Taylor; Jeremy Meier; Harlan Muntz; Jonathan Skirko Journal: Cleft Palate Craniofac J Date: 2020-03-24