Northumberland County Council Communication Support Service, Stannington, Morpeth, UK.
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2010 May-Jun;45(3):354-67. doi: 10.3109/13682820903040268.
Increased demand for access to specialist services for providing support to children with speech, language and communication needs prompted a local service review of how best to allocate limited resources. This study arose as a consequence of a wish to evaluate the effectiveness of an enhanced consultative approach to delivering speech and language intervention in local schools.
The purpose was to evaluate an intensive speech and language intervention for children in mainstream schools delivered by specialist teaching assistants.
METHODS & PROCEDURES: A within-subjects, quasi-experimental exploratory trial was conducted, with each child serving as his or her own control with respect to the primary outcome measure. Thirty-five children between the ages of 4;2 and 6;10 (years; months) received speech and/or language intervention for an average of four 1-hour sessions per week over 10 weeks. The primary outcome measure consisted of change between pre- and post-intervention scores on probe tasks of treated and untreated behaviours summed across the group of children, and maintenance probes of treated behaviours. Secondary outcome measures included standardized tests (Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals - Preschool(UK) (CELF-P(UK)); Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology (DEAP)) and questionnaires completed by parents/carers and school staff before and after the intervention period.
OUTCOME & RESULTS: The primary outcome measure showed improvement over the intervention period, with target behaviours showing a significantly larger increase than control behaviours. The gains made on the target behaviours as a result of intervention were sustained when reassessed 3-12 months later. These findings were replicated on a second set of targets and controls. Significant gains were also observed on CELF-Preschool(UK) receptive and expressive language standard scores from pre- to post-intervention. However, DEAP standard scores of speech ability did not increase over the intervention period, although improvements in raw scores were observed. Questionnaires completed before and after intervention showed some significant differences relating to how much the child's speech and language difficulties affected him/her at home and at school.
CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This exploratory study demonstrates the benefit of an intensive therapy delivered by specialist teaching assistants for remediating speech and language difficulties experienced by young children in mainstream schools. The service delivery model was perceived by professionals as offering an inclusive and effective practice and provides empirical support for using both direct and indirect intervention in the school setting.
对获得专门服务以支持有言语、语言和沟通需求的儿童的需求增加,促使对如何最佳分配有限资源进行了当地服务审查。这项研究是为了评估在当地学校提供言语和语言干预的强化咨询方法的有效性而产生的。
评估由专业教学助理在主流学校为儿童提供的强化言语和语言干预。
进行了一项单组、准实验性探索性试验,每个儿童作为自己的对照组,主要结局指标为自身对照。35 名 4 岁 2 个月至 6 岁 10 个月(年、月)的儿童每周接受平均 4 次、每次 1 小时的言语和/或语言干预,共 10 周。主要结局指标是通过对经过治疗和未经治疗的行为的探测任务进行评分,得出经过治疗的行为的总和,以及对经过治疗的行为进行维持性探测。次要结局指标包括标准化测试(临床语言基础评估 - 学前版(英国)(CELF-P(英国));语音评估诊断(DEAP))和家长/照顾者和学校工作人员在干预前后完成的问卷。
主要结局指标显示在干预期间有所改善,目标行为的增加明显大于对照行为。干预后 3-12 个月重新评估时,治疗行为的改善得以维持。这些发现复制到第二组目标和对照中。干预后,CELF-Preschool(英国)接受性和表达性语言标准分数也显著提高。然而,DEAP 语音能力标准分数在干预期间没有增加,尽管原始分数有所提高。干预前后完成的问卷显示,与儿童在家中和学校的言语和语言困难对他/她的影响程度有关的一些显著差异。
这项探索性研究表明,由专业教学助理提供的强化治疗对主流学校中幼儿的言语和语言困难有好处。专业人员认为这种服务提供模式具有包容性和有效性,并为在学校环境中使用直接和间接干预提供了实证支持。