Kathy Coufal1, Douglas Parham2, Melissa Jakubowitz3, Cassandra Howell4, Jared Reyes2. 1. Special Education and Communication Disorders, University of Nebraska at Omaha. 2. Communication Sciences and Disorders, Wichita State University, KS. 3. LTHPFXR Consulting, Lafayette, CA. 4. Speech-Language Pathology, El Paso County District 8, Fountain, CO.
Abstract
Purpose: Using American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's (ASHA's) National Outcomes Measurement System (NOMS) Functional Communication Measure (FCM) as a common metric, this investigation compared traditional service delivery and telepractice service delivery for children receiving therapy for the NOMS diagnostic category of "speech sound production." Method: De-identified cases were secured from ASHA's NOMS database and a proprietary database from a private e-learning provider. Cases were included if they met 3 criteria: (a) children received treatment exclusively for speech sound production, (b) they were between 6.0 and 9.5 years old, and (c) they received therapy lasting between 4 and 9 months. A total of 1,331 ASHA NOMS cases and 428 telepractice cases were included. The 2 groups were matched by initial FCM scores. Mann-Whitney U tests were completed to compare differences in the median change scores (the difference between the initial and final FCM scores) between the 2 groups. Results: There were no significant differences in the median change scores between the traditional group and the telepractice group. Conclusions: These results suggest comparable treatment outcomes between traditional service delivery and telepractice for treatment of children exhibiting speech sound disorders. The findings provide support for the use of telepractice for school-age children.
Purpose: Using American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's (ASHA's) National Outcomes Measurement System (NOMS) Functional Communication Measure (FCM) as a common metric, this investigation compared traditional service delivery and telepractice service delivery for children receiving therapy for the NOMS diagnostic category of "speech sound production." Method: De-identified cases were secured from ASHA's NOMS database and a proprietary database from a private e-learning provider. Cases were included if they met 3 criteria: (a) children received treatment exclusively for speech sound production, (b) they were between 6.0 and 9.5 years old, and (c) they received therapy lasting between 4 and 9 months. A total of 1,331 ASHA NOMS cases and 428 telepractice cases were included. The 2 groups were matched by initial FCM scores. Mann-Whitney U tests were completed to compare differences in the median change scores (the difference between the initial and final FCM scores) between the 2 groups. Results: There were no significant differences in the median change scores between the traditional group and the telepractice group. Conclusions: These results suggest comparable treatment outcomes between traditional service delivery and telepractice for treatment of children exhibiting speech sound disorders. The findings provide support for the use of telepractice for school-age children.