Gee (2010)

CRITIQUE OF UNSUPPORTED PROCEDURAL DESCRIPTIONS

(also known as Expert Opinion)

 

NOTES: A summary of the intervention presented in this article can be found by scrolling approximately ½ way down this page.

 

KEY
C = clinician

CAS = childhood apraxia of speech

NA = not applicable

P = patient or participant

pmh = Patricia Hargrove, blog developer

SLP = speech-language pathologist

 

 

Source: Gee, S. M. (2010). Pediatric speech-language pathology corner: Improving prosody in childhood apraxia of speech. ARTICLE Retrieved on August 16, 2016 from http://www.pediastaff.com/blog/speech-language-pathology-corner-improving-prosody-in-childhood-apraxia-of-speech-1389 ARTICLE:

 

Reviewer(s): pmh

 

Date: August 18, 2016

 

Overall Assigned Grade: No grade because there are no supporting data.

 

Level of Evidence: Expert Opinion, no supporting evidence for the effectiveness of the intervention although the author may provide secondary evidence supporting components of the intervention.

 

Take Away: This brief, thoughtful discussion of role of prosody in the treatment of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) provides a rationale for targeting prosody relatively early in the intervention process to reduce, or even prevent, the atypical prosody often observed in the speech of children with CAS. The author recommends focusing on coarticulation or concordance which involves the smooth transition from one speech sound to the next.

 

 

  1. Was there a review of the literature supporting components of the intervention? No. This was a very short article.

 

 

  1. Were the specific procedures/components of the intervention tied to the reviewed literature? Not Applicable

 

 

  1. Was the intervention based on clinically sound clinical procedures? Yes

 

 

  1. Did the author(s) provide a rationale for components of the intervention? Yes

 

 

  1. Description of outcome measures:

 

  • Are outcome measures suggested? Yes _ ____

 

  • Outcome #1: Production of speech with acceptable coarticulation (smooth transitions between adjacent speech sounds) or concordance

 

 

  1. Was generalization addressed? No

 

 

  1. Was maintenance addressed? No

 

 

SUMMARY OF INTERVENTION

 

PURPOSE: To produce speech that has a natural, fluid flow.

 

POPULATION: Childhood Apraxia of Speech; Children

 

MODALITY TARGETED: Production

 

ELEMENTS/FUNCTIONS OF PROSODY TARGETED: concordance/coarticulation, tempo (blending phonemes, pausing), stress (weak strong forms)

 

OTHER ASPECTS OF LANGUAGE/COMMUNICATION TARGETED: speech sounds (flapping or voicing of /t/ before unstressed syllables)

 

MAJOR COMPONENTS:

 

  • Initiate prosody intervention when the participant (P) can use CVC syllables to label objects. At this time, intervention should also target the production of 2 syllable words.

 

  • The clinician (C) should model and require P to produce “a” before all single syllable words. (Obviously, this also targets the production of articles, thus preventing the omission of articles in the speech of the P.)

 

  • As the P starts to use 2 word phrases, C should target Verb + Article + Object (e.g., hit a ball) instead of Verb + Object (e.g., hit ball.)

 

  • C models and encourages P to produce /t/ as /d/ when /t/ precedes an unstressed syllable beginning with a vowel in 2 syllable words.

 

  • C models and encourages P to produce the unstressed versions of “a” and “the.”

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: