Matches in Ghent University Academic Bibliography for { <https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8722286> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 26 of
26
with 100 items per page.
- 8722286 classification A1.
- 8722286 date "2022".
- 8722286 language "eng".
- 8722286 type journalArticle.
- 8722286 hasPart 8740486.pdf.
- 8722286 subject "Medicine and Health Sciences".
- 8722286 doi "10.1044/2021_JSLHR-21-00405".
- 8722286 issn "1092-4388".
- 8722286 issn "1558-9102".
- 8722286 issue "2".
- 8722286 volume "65".
- 8722286 abstract "Purpose. Speech-language pathologists usually apply a “one size fits all” approach to eliminate compensatory cleft speech characteristics (CSCs). It is necessary to investigate what intervention works best for a particular patient. This pilot study compared the effectiveness of two therapy approaches (a motor-phonetic approach and a linguistic-phonological approach) on different subtypes of compensatory CSCs in Dutch-speaking children with a cleft (lip and) palate (CP±L). Methods. Fourteen children with a CP±L (M age = 7.71 years) were divided into two groups using block randomization stratified by age, gender, and type of compensatory CSC. Six children received intervention to eliminate anterior oral CSCs (n = 3 motor-phonetic intervention, n = 3 linguistic-phonological intervention). Eight children received intervention to eliminate non-oral CSCs (n = 4 motor-phonetic intervention, n = 4 linguistic-phonological intervention). Each child received 10 hr of speech intervention divided over 2 weeks. Perceptual and psychosocial outcome measures were used to determine intervention effects. Results. Children who received linguistic-phonological intervention to eliminate anterior oral CSCs had significantly higher correctly produced consonant scores and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores compared to children who received motor-phonetic intervention to eliminate anterior oral CSCs. In the group of children who received intervention to eliminate non-oral CSCs, no significant differences were found in the correctly produced consonant scores nor in the HRQoL scores between the two intervention approaches. Conclusions. Linguistic-phonological intervention seems to be more appropriate to eliminate anterior oral CSCs. The beneficial effects of linguistic-phonological intervention were less pronounced in children with non-oral CSCs. Perhaps, children with non-oral CSCs benefit more from a hybrid phonetic-phonological approach. This study is a step forward in the provision of performance-specific intervention in children with a CP±L. Replication in larger samples is needed and will aid to tailor treatment plans to the needs of our patients.".
- 8722286 author 023B4E20-F0EE-11E1-A9DE-61C894A0A6B4.
- 8722286 author 3802BD90-F0EE-11E1-A9DE-61C894A0A6B4.
- 8722286 author 4878DCA0-347F-11E4-8E38-EC53B5D1D7B1.
- 8722286 author F49BBC3C-F0ED-11E1-A9DE-61C894A0A6B4.
- 8722286 author urn:uuid:5b35bd25-b25e-48ca-b9f2-032a1e3c8f16.
- 8722286 author urn:uuid:dfad16e2-0ff9-4454-a877-45dedcfb3f38.
- 8722286 dateCreated "2021-10-05T06:05:52Z".
- 8722286 dateModified "2024-07-09T15:47:47Z".
- 8722286 name "One size doesn’t fit all : a pilot study towards performance-specific speech intervention in children with a cleft (lip and) palate".
- 8722286 pagination urn:uuid:ccafdccb-8dcc-4f56-9fac-9dbe97aaa221.
- 8722286 sameAs LU-8722286.
- 8722286 sourceOrganization urn:uuid:1400869d-00dd-4a0e-a6a5-e6a7598c9f69.
- 8722286 sourceOrganization urn:uuid:45f0c43a-3874-40f6-8527-96e4ec9a7d2b.
- 8722286 type A1.