Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
Department of Communication, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2021 May 18;30(3):1023-1037. doi: 10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00093. Epub 2021 Mar 31.
Purpose Early intervention using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) supports both receptive and expressive language skills. However, many parents and clinicians still worry that augmented language intervention might delay or impair speech development. This study aimed to (a) characterize and analyze the speech sound development of toddlers with developmental delay who participated in a parent-implemented language intervention; (b) examine the accuracy of speech sounds among toddlers who participated in an augmented language intervention using speech-generating devices and toddlers who participated in a traditional, spoken language intervention; and (c) examine the relationship between baseline factors (i.e., receptive and expressive language skills, vocal imitation, and number of unintelligible utterances) and the number of spoken target vocabulary words after intervention. Method This study used extant data from two randomized control trials of parent-implemented language interventions using AAC or spoken language. Out of 109 children who completed the intervention, 45 children produced spoken target vocabulary words at the end of the intervention. We identified and phonetically transcribed spoken target vocabulary words for each child and then classified them based on Shriberg and Kwiatkowski's (1982) developmental sound classes. Results Children's speech sound accuracy was not significantly different across intervention groups. Overall, children who produced more words had more speech sound errors and higher baseline language scores. Intervention group and baseline receptive and expressive language skills significantly predicted the number of spoken target vocabulary words produced at the end of intervention. Conclusions Participation in AAC intervention resulted in significantly more spoken target vocabulary words and no statistically significant differences in speech sound errors when compared to children who received spoken language intervention without AAC. Results support using AAC interventions for very young children without the fear that it will delay speech or spoken language development. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14265365.
目的 早期使用辅助沟通(AAC)进行干预可以支持接受性和表达性语言技能。然而,许多家长和临床医生仍然担心,增强语言干预可能会延迟或损害言语发展。本研究旨在:(a)描述和分析接受辅助语言干预的发育迟缓幼儿的言语发展情况;(b)比较使用言语生成设备进行增强语言干预和使用传统口语进行干预的幼儿的言语准确性;(c)检验基线因素(即接受性和表达性语言技能、嗓音模仿和不可理解言语的数量)与干预后口语目标词汇量的关系。 方法 本研究使用了两项使用 AAC 或口语进行家长实施语言干预的随机对照试验的现有数据。在完成干预的 109 名儿童中,有 45 名儿童在干预结束时产生了口语目标词汇。我们为每个孩子识别并音标化了口语目标词汇,并根据 Shriberg 和 Kwiatkowski(1982)的发展性语音类别对其进行分类。 结果 各组干预儿童的言语准确性无显著差异。总体而言,产生更多词汇的儿童言语错误更多,基线语言分数更高。干预组和基线接受性和表达性语言技能显著预测了干预结束时产生的口语目标词汇量。 结论 与接受无 AAC 口语语言干预的儿童相比,接受 AAC 干预的儿童产生的口语目标词汇量显著增加,且言语错误没有统计学差异。结果支持对非常年幼的儿童使用 AAC 干预,而不必担心这会延迟言语或口语发展。 补充材料 https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14265365.