Background
Parents’ play an essential role in Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) as the primary agent of intervention with their child. Unfortunately, speech and language therapists (SLTs) ...report that parents’ engagement is challenging when conducting PCIT. Although focusing on and stimulating the engagement of parents, when needed, can increase the success of PCIT, little is known about what factors influence parent engagement.
Aims
To explore SLTs’ views about the factors that facilitate or pose barriers to parents’ engagement in PCIT.
Methods & Procedures
A secondary analysis of 10 interview transcripts about SLTs’ views on delivering PCIT with parents of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) was conducted. Codes from the original analysis where checked for their relevance to parents’ engagement by the first author. Potential themes were identified iteratively with all authors.
Outcomes & Results
Four themes were identified in the SLTs’ description of their experiences with the engagement of parents: mutual understanding, creating a constructive relationship between the SLT and parent, parental empowerment, and barriers. It became clear that SLTs were focusing on different aspects of engagement.
Conclusions & Implications
This study makes an initial contribution to our understanding of SLTs’ view of parents’ engagement and about what stimulates parent engagement or effects disengagement. SLTs play an important role in supporting parents to engage and stay engaged with therapy. Training SLTs on how best to engage parents, focusing on mutual understanding, creating constructive relationships between the SLT and parent, parental empowerment, and barriers, is necessary. However, more research is needed on how to train relevant skills in SLTs. Clearer definitions of engagement would improve understanding and judgements about how best to support parents.
Purpose: Most speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with children with developmental language disorder (DLD) do not perform language sample analysis (LSA) on a regular basis, although they do ...regard LSA as highly informative for goal setting and evaluating grammatical therapy. The primary aim of this study was to identify facilitators, barriers, and needs related to performing LSA by Dutch SLPs working with children with DLD. The secondary aim was to investigate whether a training would change the actual performance of LSA. Method: A focus group with 11 SLPs working in Dutch speech-language pathology practices was conducted. Barriers, facilitators, and needs were identified using thematic analysis and categorized using the theoretical domain framework. To address the barriers, a training was developed using software program CLAN. Changes in barriers and use of LSA were evaluated with a survey sent to participants before, directly after, and 3 months posttraining. Results: The barriers reported in the focus group were SLPs' lack of knowledge and skills, time investment, negative beliefs about their capabilities, differences in beliefs about their professional role, and no reimbursement from health insurance companies. Posttraining survey results revealed that LSA was not performed more often in daily practice. Using CLAN was not the solution according to participating SLPs. Time investment remained a huge barrier. Conclusions: A training in performing LSA did not resolve the time investment barrier experienced by SLPs. User-friendly software, developed in codesign with SLPs might provide a solution. For the short-term, shorter samples, preferably from narrative tasks, should be considered.
Background
Collaboration between therapists and parents of children with developmental disabilities is a key element of family‐centred care. In practice, collaboration appears to be challenging for ...both parents and therapists. This systematic review aims to make explicit how therapists can optimise their collaboration with parents of young children with developmental disabilities, according to the perspectives of parents and therapists.
Methods
A systematic review was conducted using the following databases: Medline (PubMed), CINAHL (OVID) and PsychINFO (OVID). Those papers were selected, which focused on collaboration using a two‐way interaction between therapists and parents, exploring the perspectives of therapists and/or parents of children between 2 and 6 years. Papers needed to be published in English or Dutch between 1998 and July 2021. Included papers were synthesised using a qualitative analysis approach by two researchers independently. Results sections were analysed line‐by‐line, and codes were formulated and discussed by all authors. Codes were aggregated, resulting in a synthesis of specific collaboration strategies in combined strategy clusters.
Results
The search generated 3439 records. In total, 24 papers were selected. Data synthesis resulted in an overview of specific strategies organised into five clusters: (1) continuously invest time in your collaboration with parents, (2) be aware of your important role in the collaboration with parents, (3) tailor your approach, (4) get to know the family and (5) empower parents to become a collaborative partner.
Conclusions
This systematic review resulted in an overview of concrete strategies for therapists to use in their collaboration with parents of children with developmental disabilities. The strategies formulated enable therapists to consciously decide how to optimise their collaboration with each individual parent. Making these strategies explicit facilitates change of practice from therapist‐led and child‐centred towards family‐centred care.
Background
Collaboration between parents and speech and language therapists (SLTs) is seen as a key element in family‐centred models. Collaboration can have positive impacts on parental and ...children's outcomes. However, collaborative practice has not been well described and researched in speech and language therapy for children and may not be easy to achieve. It is important that we gain a deeper understanding of collaborative practice with parents, how it can be achieved and how it can impact on outcomes. This understanding could support practitioners in daily practice with regard to achieving collaborative practice with parents in different contexts.
Aims
To set a research agenda on collaborative practice between parents and SLTs in order to generate evidence regarding what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent.
Methods & Procedures
A realist evaluation approach was used to make explicit what collaborative practice with parents entails. The steps suggested by the RAMESES II project were used to draft a preliminary programme theory about collaborative practice between parents and SLTs. This process generates explicit hypotheses which form a potential research agenda.
Discussion & Conclusions
A preliminary programme theory of collaborative practice with parents was drafted using a realist approach. Potential contextual factors (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O) were presented which could be configured into causal mechanisms to help explain what works for whom in what circumstances. CMO configurations were drafted, based on the relevant literature, which serve as exemplars to illustrate how this methodology could be used. In order to debate, test and expand our hypothesized programme theory for collaborative practice with parents, further testing against a broader literature is required alongside research to explore the functionality of the configurations across contexts. This paper highlights the importance of further research on collaborative practice with parents and the potential value of realist evaluation methodology.
What this paper adds
Current policy in education, health and social care advocates for family‐centred care and collaborative practice with parents. Thereby, collaborative practice is the preferred practice for SLTs and parents. In this paper, we explore collaborative practice and use a realist evaluation approach to achieve the aim of setting a research agenda in this area. Researchers use realist evaluation, a methodology originally developed by Pawson and Tilley in the 1990s, to explore the causal link between interventions and outcomes, summarized as what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. Realist evaluation provides a framework to explore configurations between contexts (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O). We used this methodology to take a first step at making explicit what collaborative practice is and how it might be achieved in different contexts. We did this by drafting a preliminary programme theory about collaborative practice, where we made explicit what context factors and mechanisms might influence outcomes in collaborative practice between parents and SLTs. Based on this programme theory, we argue for the need to develop a research agenda on collaborative practice with parents of children with speech, language and communication needs. The steps between a programme theory and a research agenda could entail exploring each CMO, or step in the programme theory, and evaluating it against the existing literature—both within and beyond speech and language therapy—to see how far it stands up. In this way, gaps could be identified that could be converted into research questions that would stimulate debate about a research agenda on collaborative practice. Understanding how collaborative practice can be achieved in different contexts could support SLTs to use mechanisms to optimise collaborative practice intentionally and tailor interventions to the specific needs of families, thereby enhancing collaborative practice between parents and SLTs.
Purpose: Our aim was to develop consensus on the definition and operationalization of communicative participation (CP) in 2- to 8-year-old children with language disorders (LDs). A clear definition ...and operationalization can facilitate the discussion about children's communication problems in daily life between parents and professionals. Method: In an online Delphi study, anonymized thoughts and opinions were collected on the definition and operationalization of CP in young children with LD. The 47 Delphi panel members were Dutch parents, young adults with LDs, teachers and assistants, speech-language pathologists, clinical linguists, and clinical researchers. Thematic content analysis was used to develop a concept definition and items operationalizing CP. The Delphi panel rated the suitability of concept definitions using a 7-point Likert scale. Concept definitions were revised with feedback from the Delphi panel until consensus was achieved. The Delphi panel rated items on how well they operationalize CP, using the same Likert scale. Results: The majority (79%) of the Delphi panel indicated that the essence of CP was captured by the definition: "CP is understanding and being understood in a social context, by applying verbal and non-verbal communication skills." In addition, 33 behavioral items were developed. Conclusion: This study resulted in strong consensus on the definition of CP between Dutch parents and professionals. Items were developed that can inform speech-language pathologists on the type of questions to ask a child's parents or teacher when discussing CP. Further research is needed on how the items can best be used in clinical practice.
Background
Collaborative practice between therapists and parents is a key element of family‐centred care and is essential if we want to address family priorities and needs in interventions. However, ...collaborative practice is challenging for speech and language therapists (SLTs) and parents. To facilitate collaboration, collaborative practices need to be implemented into speech and language therapy for young children with developmental language disorders (DLD) and their families. Actual change and implementation of collaboration in practice will be successful only when it corresponds with patients’ needs, in our case the needs of parents of young children with DLD.
Aims
To explore parents’ needs in their collaboration with SLTs during therapy for their young child with DLD.
Methods & Procedures
Parents of children with (a risk of) DLD in the age of 2–6 years were eligible for participation. We recruited parents via SLTs. Twelve parents of children with DLD participated in semi‐structured interviews about their needs in collaboration with SLTs. We used a phenomenological approach focusing on parents’ lived experiences. We transcribed the interviews verbatim. All interviews were read/listened to and discussed by our parent panel, multiple researchers and the interviewer. Two researchers independently analysed the data using the reflective thematic analysis of Braun and Clarke.
Outcomes & Results
The analysis of the interviews resulted in six themes: (1) knowing what to expect, (2) knowing how to contribute, (3) feeling capable of supporting the child, (4) trusting the therapist, (5) alignment with parents and children's needs, preferences and priorities and (6) time and space for asking questions and sharing information.
Conclusions & Implications
Parents want SLTs to invest time in collaborating with them. Parents need SLTs to empower them to become a collaborative partner and enable them to support their child in daily life. Parents need knowledge about the therapy process and diagnosis and skills in how to support their child's language development. Also, they need emotional support to feel secure enough to support their child, to ask questions to therapists and to bring up their own thoughts and opinions in therapy. Parents’ needs are in line with collaborative working as described in literature, which underlines the importance of implementing collaborative working in speech and language therapy for young children with DLD.
WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS
What is already known on the subject
Several reviews have explored parents’ perspectives on speech and language therapy. Results reveal parents’ experiences with speech and language therapy in general, and parents’ perspectives on specific topics such as shared decision‐making and parents/therapists roles in therapy.
What this study adds
This study adds insights into parents’ needs to ensure collaboration with speech and language therapists (SLTs). Parents of young children with developmental language disorders (DLD) need SLTs to invest time to create optimal collaboration. It is important for parents to have enough knowledge about DLD and the SLT process, skills and confidence in how to support their child and opportunities to share thoughts and questions with SLTs. Our results underline the importance of parents being empowered by SLTs to become a collaborative partner.
What are the clinical implications of this work?
When children are referred to speech and language therapy, parents often venture into an unknown journey. They need support from SLTs to become a collaborative partner in speech and language therapy. Parents need SLTs to invest time in sharing knowledge, skills and power and align therapy to parents’ and child's needs, preferences, priorities and expectations.
Background
Despite the compelling case for engaging parents in speech and language therapy, research indicates that speech and language therapists (SLTs) currently have a leading role in the ...goal‐setting process of therapy for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). Therefore, we set out to develop a tool that aims to support the dialogue between SLTs and parents and enhance shared decision‐making about children's communicative participation goals. We used co‐design techniques with SLT–practitioners to include their perspectives throughout the design process. Although co‐design has been used for some years in healthcare research, it is still a relatively new research methodology in the field of speech and language therapy.
Aims
To provide a detailed description of the co‐design process that led to the development of a physical artefact that can support SLTs to engage parents of children with DLD in collaborative goal‐setting.
Methods & Procedures
The Design Council's Double Diamond model was used to develop a tool in co‐design, together with eight SLTs, who participated in all stages of the development process. Usability was tested in actual goal‐setting conversations between four SLTs and 11 parents of a child with DLD resulting in stepwise improvements. In addition, usability of the first and final prototypes was tested with five usability criteria that were rated on a 10‐point scale by 64 SLTs.
Outcomes & Results
The co‐design process resulted in the development of a physical prototype of the tool called ‘ENGAGE’, consisting of a metal ‘tree trunk’ on which parents can stick magnetic ‘leaves’ containing potential participation goals for their child. The ‘tree’ shape represents a child's development and opportunities for growth. This first prototype received marks between 7.0 and 8.0 out of 10 on attractiveness, user‐friendliness, safety, functionality and affordability. After several iterations, there were significantly higher marks for attractiveness, user‐friendliness and safety in favour for the final prototype. Marks for functionality and affordability did not change significantly.
Conclusions & Implications
As researchers we usually develop pen‐and‐paper tools, interview protocols, apps or questionnaires to support clinical practice. Including the SLTs’ perspectives in the design process resulted in a tree‐shaped physical artefact that, according to the SLTs, helps to order information and encourages and guides their dialogue with parents. We strongly advocate the inclusion of end‐users in developing innovative user‐centred tools for speech and language therapy and we hope that this will become widespread practice.
WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS
What is already known on the subject
Collaborative goal‐setting is at the heart of family‐centred speech and language therapy. However, research indicates that goal‐setting processes for children with DLD are currently predominantly therapist‐led, instead of family‐centred. Reasons for the lack of parental engagement are that effective communication with parents throughout the goal‐setting process appears to be complex, and parents are not always invited and supported to engage in this. We used co‐design to develop a tool that aims to support SLTs in their dialogue about therapy goals with parents.
What this paper adds to existing knowledge
This paper provides an example of applying a co‐design approach for the development of a shared goal‐setting tool for SLTs and parents of young children with DLD. The co‐design approach enabled us to incorporate needs, experiences and ideas of SLTs in the design process. We report the four stages in the co‐design process from (1) discovering the needs, wants and desires of the people involved, (2) defining the problem that SLTs experience, (3) developing several solutions and selecting the best solution, and (4) developing and testing the prototype. The detailed description of this process can add to an understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of a design process that includes the perspective of end‐users. The result is a physical artefact representing a tree, which aims to support the conversation between SLTs and parents about a child's communicative participation. Items describing facets of communicative participation are printed on ‘leaves’ that can be hung on a tree trunk by parents. The tree shape is a positive metaphor for the growth and development of a child.
What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?
This study describes how SLTs can be meaningfully involved as partners in a co‐design research approach. Incorporating experience from clinical practice was highly relevant since our study aimed to create a solution that would support goal‐setting and service delivery by SLTs. We want to show that it is inspiring and beneficial for SLTs to partner with researchers in innovation of their own clinical practice and provide examples of co‐design activities that illustrate the involvement and influence of end‐users in a design process. Including the perspective of SLTs in the development of a new tool to facilitate the dialogue between SLTs and parents of children with DLD regarding therapy goal‐setting is expected to add value and enhance its implementation in clinical practice.
A common early intervention approach for preschool children with language problems is parent–child interaction therapy (PCIT). PCIT has positive effects for children with expressive language ...problems. It appears that speech and language therapists (SLTs) conduct this therapy in many different ways. This might be because of the variety of approaches available, the diverse set of families SLTs work with or the different organizational structures. Understanding the critical components of PCIT would enable SLTs to map the variations that are implemented and researchers to evaluate the effects of such variation. This study aimed to identify the potentially critical components of PCIT based on the practical experience of SLTs and to identify SLTs’ rationales for the way they structure PCIT. Both parameters are important for the long term goal, that is, to develop a framework that can be used to support practice. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 SLTs who had at least one year experience in delivering PCIT with preschool children with language impairment. The interviews were transcribed and analysed, using thematic analysis. Analysis of the SLT interview data identified four potentially critical components that underpin the teaching of strategies to parents: parents’ engagement, parents’ understanding, parents’ reflection and therapists’ skills. SLTs suggested that all four components are needed for the successful delivery of PCIT. The reasons that SLTs give for the way in which they structure PCIT are mainly based on organizational constraints, family needs and practicalities. SLTs consider PCIT to be valuable but challenging to implement. A framework that makes explicit these components may be beneficial to support practice.
Purpose: Although researchers have explored parental perspectives of childhood speech and language disorders, most studies have been conducted in English-speaking countries. Little is known about ...parental experiences across countries, where procedures of language screening and services for language disorders differ. The authors participated in the COST Action network IS1406, "Enhancing Children's Oral Language Skills Across Europe and Beyond," which provided an opportunity to conduct cross-country qualitative interviews with parents. The aim of this pilot study was to explore ways in which parents construed and described speech and language disorders across countries. Method: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with parents from 10 families in 10 different countries. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings: The overall theme was "acknowledging parental expertise." The parents described, in detail, ways in which their children's speech and language (dis)abilities had an impact on the children's everyday life. Three subthemes were identified: impairment, disability, and changes over time. Conclusions: The findings suggest that, across a range of countries, parents demonstrated contextualized understandings of their children's speech and language (dis)abilities, along with the everyday functional implications of the disorders. Hence, despite not holding professional knowledge about language disorders, the voices, views, understandings, and personal experiences of parents in relation to their child's disorder should be listened to when planning therapy services.
•Language disorder is an invisible neuropsychological condition.•There is a lack of knowledge on how parents construe their child’s disorder.•Parents from nine countries engaged in qualitative ...interviews.•Parents reported children were excluded due to their language disorder.•Parents as pro-active advocates for their children’s inclusion.
Although researchers have explored parental perspectives on childhood speech and language disorders, this work has mostly been conducted in English-speaking countries. Little is known about parental experiences across countries. Participation in the COST Action IS1406 ‘Enhancing children’s oral language skills across Europe and beyond’ provided an opportunity to conduct cross-cultural qualitative interviews. The aims were to explore how parents construe inclusion and/or exclusion of their child and how parents involve themselves in order to facilitate inclusion.
Parents from nine countries and with a child who had received services for speech-language disorder participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews. We used thematic analysis to analyze the data.
Two overarching themes were identified: ‘Language disabilities led to social exclusion’ and ‘Promoting pathways to social inclusion’. Two subthemes were identified Interpersonal relationships are important and Deliberate proactiveness as stepping stones for social inclusion.
Across countries, parents report that their children’s hidden disability causes misunderstandings that can lead to social exclusion and that they are important advocates for their children. It is important that the voices and experiences of parents of children with developmental disabilities are understood and acknowledged. Parents’ recommendations about how to support social inclusion need to be addressed at all levels of society.
PDF
