Andrews G, Guitar B, Howie P
J Speech Hear Disord. 1980 Aug;45(3):287-307. doi: 10.1044/jshd.4503.287.
Despite the many reports of stuttering treatment, there is little consensus either on the long term effectiveness of treatment or on which treatments are the most effective. The literature was searched for treatment outcome studies that reported sufficient data to allow a meta-analysis to be conducted. Forty-two studies covering the treatment of a total of 756 stutterers were located. In these studies the typical client was a 25-year-old severe stutterer who received 80 hours of symptom reduction treatment. Most studies used reliable measures of both stuttering and attitude to assess improvement some six months after treatment had ended. Treatment effects were calculated from 116 pre- and posttreatment pairs of measures. Average effect size was 1.3, which indicates that after treatment the groups of stutterers experienced a 1.3 standard deviation improvement in their pretreatment scores. Clearly, stuttering treatments can be beneficial, and the benefits appear comparable to other treatments in the health sciences. Prolonged speech and gentle onset techniques evidenced better gains in the short term and long term than either attitude or airflow techniques. These four seem preferable to any of the other reported treatments and were certainly better than no treatment.
尽管有许多关于口吃治疗的报告，但对于治疗的长期有效性以及哪些治疗方法最有效，几乎没有达成共识。检索文献以查找报告了足够数据以进行荟萃分析的治疗结果研究。共找到42项研究，涉及总共756名口吃者的治疗。在这些研究中，典型的患者是一名25岁的严重口吃者，接受了80小时的症状减轻治疗。大多数研究使用可靠的口吃和态度测量方法来评估治疗结束约六个月后的改善情况。从116对治疗前后的测量数据中计算出治疗效果。平均效应大小为1.3，这表明治疗后口吃者群体在治疗前得分上有1.3个标准差的改善。显然，口吃治疗可能是有益的，而且其益处似乎与健康科学中的其他治疗方法相当。与态度或气流技术相比，延长言语和温和起音技术在短期和长期内都显示出更好的效果。这四种方法似乎比其他任何已报道的治疗方法都更可取，而且肯定比不治疗要好。
