Franken Marie-Christine J, Kielstra-Van der Schalk Carine J, Boelens Harrie
ENT Department, Hearing and Speech Center, Erasmus MC-Sophia, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
J Fluency Disord. 2005;30(3):189-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2005.05.002.
This pilot study compared two treatments for stuttering in preschool-age children. Thirty children were randomly assigned to either a Lidcombe Program (LP) treatment or a Demands and Capacities Model (DCM) treatment. Stuttering frequencies and severity ratings were obtained immediately before and after treatment (12 weeks). The stuttering frequencies and severity ratings significantly decreased for both treatment groups. No differences between groups were found. Parents of children in both groups were cooperative in many respects, and there were no differences between them on scales that measured their satisfaction with the two treatments. The findings suggest that randomized controlled trials of LP versus DCM treatments are feasible, and they underline the need for experimental analyses of the two treatments.
The reader will be able to: (1) describe the principles and methods of Lidcombe treatment for early stuttering; (2) delineate principles and methods of Demands and Capacities Model treatment; and (3) summarize results of an investigation that compared these programs' relative effects in a pilot study.
本试点研究比较了两种针对学龄前儿童口吃的治疗方法。30名儿童被随机分配接受利德combe计划(LP)治疗或需求与能力模型(DCM)治疗。在治疗前(12周)和治疗后立即获取口吃频率和严重程度评分。两个治疗组的口吃频率和严重程度评分均显著降低。未发现组间差异。两组儿童的家长在许多方面都很配合,在衡量他们对两种治疗满意度的量表上也没有差异。研究结果表明,LP与DCM治疗的随机对照试验是可行的,并且强调了对这两种治疗进行实验分析的必要性。
读者将能够:(1)描述利德combe早期口吃治疗的原则和方法;(2)阐述需求与能力模型治疗的原则和方法;(3)总结一项在试点研究中比较这些方案相对效果的调查结果。