Literature DB >> 27296780

Motor-based treatment with and without ultrasound feedback for residual speech-sound errors.

Jonathan L Preston1, Megan C Leece2, Edwin Maas3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a need to develop effective interventions and to compare the efficacy of different interventions for children with residual speech-sound errors (RSSEs). Rhotics (the r-family of sounds) are frequently in error American English-speaking children with RSSEs and are commonly targeted in treatment. One treatment approach involves the use of ultrasound visual feedback of the tongue. AIMS: Although prior studies have shown that children with RSSEs acquire rhotics and generalize to untrained words with ultrasound visual feedback treatment, predictions from schema-based motor learning theory suggest that visual feedback might impede generalization. Therefore, the primary aim was to compare the generalization of rhotics treated with and without ultrasound in children with RSSEs. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Twelve children aged 10-16 years with RSSEs affecting rhotics participated in a multiple-baseline single-case design with two treatment phases. For each participant, rhotics in one syllable position were treated for 7 h-long sessions with ultrasound visual feedback and rhotics in a different syllable position were treated without ultrasound in a second treatment phase. The order of treatment conditions was counterbalanced across participants. A treatment framework incorporating the principles of motor learning through chaining procedures was implemented across both treatment phases; thus the primary distinction between conditions was the use of ultrasound visual feedback. OUTCOMES &
RESULTS: On average, both treatments resulted in an approximately 30% increase in accuracy of untreated words in seven sessions. However, variability in response suggested some children showed a preferential response to one treatment over another, some responded well to both interventions, and some responded minimally to both interventions. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Motor-based treatment with and without ultrasound visual feedback of the tongue may aid in speech-sound acquisition for children with RSSEs. Both approaches may be viable options for some children. Future research is necessary to determine which children are the best candidates for interventions with and without ultrasound visual feedback.
© 2016 Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists.

Entities:  

Keywords:  motor learning; residual speech-sound errors; rhotics; ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27296780      PMCID: PMC5156595          DOI: 10.1111/1460-6984.12259

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Lang Commun Disord        ISSN: 1368-2822            Impact factor:   3.020


  17 in total

1.  Learning a coordination skill: interactive effects of instruction and feedback.

Authors:  N J Hodges; I M Franks
Journal:  Res Q Exerc Sport       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.500

2.  Development of [j] in young, midwestern, American children.

Authors:  Richard S McGowan; Susan Nittrouer; Carol J Manning
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Intensity in phonological intervention: is there a prescribed amount?

Authors:  A Lynn Williams
Journal:  Int J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 2.484

Review 4.  Principles of motor learning in treatment of motor speech disorders.

Authors:  Edwin Maas; Donald A Robin; Shannon N Austermann Hula; Skott E Freedman; Gabriele Wulf; Kirrie J Ballard; Richard A Schmidt
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.408

5.  Adolescent outcomes of children with early speech sound disorders with and without language impairment.

Authors:  Barbara A Lewis; Lisa Freebairn; Jessica Tag; Allison A Ciesla; Sudha K Iyengar; Catherine M Stein; H Gerry Taylor
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.408

6.  Speech perception training can facilitate sound production learning.

Authors:  S Rvachew
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1994-04

7.  Retroflex versus bunched in treatment for rhotic misarticulation: evidence from ultrasound biofeedback intervention.

Authors:  Tara McAllister Byun; Elaine R Hitchcock; Michelle T Swartz
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Enhancing generalisation in biofeedback intervention using the challenge point framework: a case study.

Authors:  Elaine R Hitchcock; Tara McAllister Byun
Journal:  Clin Linguist Phon       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 1.346

9.  Nonword repetition and child language impairment.

Authors:  C Dollaghan; T F Campbell
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 10.  The Articulatory Phonetics of /r/ for Residual Speech Errors.

Authors:  Suzanne E Boyce
Journal:  Semin Speech Lang       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 1.761

View more
  16 in total

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

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Tara McAllister; Emily Phillips; Suzanne Boyce; Mark Tiede; Jackie Sihyun Kim; Douglas H Whalen
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 2.408

2.  Ultrasound Images of the Tongue: A Tutorial for Assessment and Remediation of Speech Sound Errors.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Tara McAllister Byun; Suzanne E Boyce; Sarah Hamilton; Mark Tiede; Emily Phillips; Ahmed Rivera-Campos; Douglas H Whalen
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 1.355

3.  Tongue shapes for rhotics in school-age children with and without residual speech errors.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Patricia McCabe; Mark Tiede; Douglas H Whalen
Journal:  Clin Linguist Phon       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 1.346

Review 4.  Tutorial: Motor-Based Treatment Strategies for /r/ Distortions.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Nina R Benway; Megan C Leece; Elaine R Hitchcock; Tara McAllister
Journal:  Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 5.  Tutorial: Speech Motor Chaining Treatment for School-Age Children With Speech Sound Disorders.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Megan C Leece; Jaclyn Storto
Journal:  Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Do Participants Report Any Undesired Effects in Ultrasound Speech Therapy?

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Gabriela Holliman-Lopez; Megan C Leece
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 2.408

7.  Treatment for Residual Rhotic Errors With High- and Low-Frequency Ultrasound Visual Feedback: A Single-Case Experimental Design.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Tara McAllister; Emily Phillips; Suzanne Boyce; Mark Tiede; Jackie S Kim; Douglas H Whalen
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2018-08-08       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Auditory Perception and Ultrasound Biofeedback Treatment Outcomes for Children With Residual /ɹ/ Distortions: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Elaine R Hitchcock; Megan C Leece
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Variable Practice to Enhance Speech Learning in Ultrasound Biofeedback Treatment for Childhood Apraxia of Speech: A Single Case Experimental Study.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Megan C Leece; Kerry McNamara; Edwin Maas
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 2.408

10.  Intensive Treatment for Persisting Rhotic Distortions: A Case Series.

Authors:  Jonathan L Preston; Megan C Leece
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 2.408

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.