University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Augment Altern Commun. 2010 Jun;26(2):87-96. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2010.481564.
This study describes uptake of augmentative and alternative communication systems by adults with intellectual disabilities; their ability to self-report at interview; differences in self-reported loneliness experiences by communication mode; and predictors of loneliness. We analyzed National Core Indicators data from 26 US states involving over 13,000 service users grouped by primary means of expression: natural speech, gestures/body language, manual signs, or communication aid/device (aided AAC). Uptake of aided AAC was low; only 0.8% of participants used aided AAC as their primary means of expression. Valid interview responding was higher in turn for participants communicating with natural speech, aided AAC, and other modes. Almost half the participants were lonely, but loneliness did not differ by communication mode used; social contact and social climate variables predicted loneliness. Individuals who used aided AAC communicated more effectively than users of other non-speech modes, supporting more widespread use of aided AAC. Loneliness was prevalent but aided AAC users were not lonelier. Interventions to reduce loneliness are discussed.
本研究描述了智力障碍成年人对辅助和替代沟通系统的使用情况;他们在访谈中自我报告的能力;不同沟通方式下孤独感体验的差异;以及孤独感的预测因素。我们分析了来自 26 个美国州的国家核心指标数据,涉及超过 13000 名服务使用者,按主要表达方式分组:自然言语、手势/肢体语言、手动符号或沟通辅助工具/设备(辅助性 AAC)。辅助性 AAC 的使用率较低;只有 0.8%的参与者将辅助性 AAC 作为他们的主要表达方式。依次来看,使用自然言语、辅助性 AAC 和其他方式进行沟通的参与者的有效访谈应答率更高。近一半的参与者感到孤独,但使用的沟通方式不同,孤独感也没有差异;社交接触和社会氛围变量预测了孤独感。使用辅助性 AAC 的个体比使用其他非言语模式的个体沟通效果更好,这支持更广泛地使用辅助性 AAC。孤独感普遍存在,但使用辅助性 AAC 的用户并不更孤独。讨论了减少孤独感的干预措施。