The Efficacy of Telehealth-Delivered Speech and Language Intervention for Primary School-Age Children: A Systematic Review.

Authors

  • Danielle Wales Central Queens University
  • Leisa Skinner Central Queens University
  • Melanie Hayman Central Queens University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2017.6219

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to determine if telehealth-delivered speech-language pathology interventions are as effective as traditional in-person delivery for primary school-age children with speech and/or language difficulties. A systematic review was conducted (in accordance with PRISMA guidelines) using five databases, two journals and reference lists. Titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion, with relevant studies reviewed in full-text. Initial searches identified 132 articles. Following exclusion of non-relevant studies, seven articles remained for inclusion. Results revealed both telehealth and in-person participants made significant and similar improvements when treatment effects were measured through five of the six outcome measures. Findings showed there is limited but promising evidence to support telehealth for delivering speech-language pathology intervention services to school-age children. Whilst this is encouraging, particularly for rural children where in-person services are limited, more rigorous study designs are required to support the efficacy of telehealth for this population.

  

References

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2003). National Outcomes Measurement System (NOMS): K-12 Speech-language pathology user's guide. Maryland: American Speech Language Hearing Association.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). Household use of information technology, Australia, 2014-15. (Cat. No. 8146.0). Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8146.0

Australian Government: National Health and Medical Research Council. (2009). NHMRC levels of evidence and grades for recommendations for developers of guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/guidelines/developers/nhmrc_levels_grades_evidence_120423.pdf

Beitchman, J. H., Wilson, B., Johnson, C. J., Atkinson, L., Young, A., Adlaf, E., . . . Douglas, L. (2001). Fourteen-year follow-up of speech/language-impaired and control children: Psychiatric outcome. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(1), 75-82. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200101000-00019

Clegg, J., Hollis, C., Mawhood, L., & Rutter, M. (2005). Developmental language disorders – a follow-up in later adult life. Cognitive, language and psychosocial outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 128-149. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00342.x

Constantinescu, G., Waite, M., Dornan, D., Rushbrooke, E., Brown, J., McGovern, J., . . . Hill, A. (2014). A pilot study of telepractice delivery for teaching listening and spoken language to children with hearing loss. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 20, 135-140. doi:10.1177/1357633X14528443

Crutchley, S., & Campbell, M. (2010). TeleSpeech therapy pilot project: Stakeholder satisfaction. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 2(2), 23-30. doi:10.5195/ijt.2010.6049

Edwards, M., Stredler-Brown, A., & Houston, K. T. (2012). Expanding use of telepractice in speech-language pathology and audiology. Volta Review, 112, 227-242.

Erdiaw-Kwasie, M. O., & Alam, K. (2016). Towards understanding digital divide in rural partnerships and development: A framework and evidence from rural Australia. Journal of Rural Studies, 43, 214-224. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.12.002

Fairweather, G. C., Lincoln, M. A., & Ramsden, R. (2016). Speech-language pathology teletherapy in rural and remote educational settings: Decreasing service inequities. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18, 592-602. doi:10.3109/17549507.2016.1143973

Gabel, R., Grogan-Johnson, S., Alvares, R., Bechstein, L., & Taylor, J. (2013). A field study of telepractice for school intervention using the ASHA NOMS K-12 database. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 35, 44-53. doi:10.1177/1525740113503035

Goldman, R., & Fristoe, M. (2002). Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation-2. Minnesota: American Guidance Service Inc.

Grogan-Johnson, S., Alvares, R., Rowan, L., & Creaghead, N. (2010). A pilot study comparing the effectiveness of speech language therapy provided by telemedicine with conventional on-site therapy. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 16, 134-139. doi:10.1258/jtt.2009.090608

Grogan-Johnson, S., Gabel, R. M., Taylor, J., Rowan, L. E., Alvares, R., & Schenker, J. (2011). A pilot investigation of speech sound disorder intervention delivered by telehealth to school-age children. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 3(1), 31-41. doi:10.5195/ijt.2011.6064

Grogan-Johnson, S., Schmidt, A. M., Schenker, J., Alvares, R., Rowan, L. E., & Taylor, J. (2013). A comparison of speech sound intervention delivered by telepractice and side-by-side service delivery models. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 34, 210-220. doi:10.1177/1525740113484965

Health Workforce Australia [HWA]. (2014). Australia’s Health Workforce series - Speech pathologists in focus. Retrieved from http://industry.gov.au/

Isaki, E., & Farrell, C. F. (2015). Provision of speech-language pathology telepractice services using apple iPads. Telemedicine and e-Health, 21, 538-549. doi:10.1089/tmj.2014.0153

Jessiman, S. M. (2003). Speech and languages services using telehealth technology in remote and underserviced areas. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology, 27(1), 45-51.

Johnson, C. J., Beitchman, J. H., & Brownlie, E. B. (2010). Twenty-year follow-up of children with and without speech-language impairments: Family, educational, occupational, and quality of life outcomes. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19(1), 51-65. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2009/08-0083)

Law, J., Boyle, J., Harris, F., Harkness, A., & Nye, C. (1998). Screening for primary speech and language delay: A systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 33(Suppl), 21-23. doi:10.3109/13682829809179388

Law, J., Garrett, Z., & Nye, C. (2003). Speech and language therapy interventions for children with primary speech and language delay or disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews(3). doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004110

Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., . . . Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLOS Medicine, 6(7), e1000100. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100

Lincoln, M., Hines, M., Fairweather, C., Ramsden, R., & Martinovich, J. (2015). Multiple stakeholder perspectives on teletherapy delivery of speech pathology services in rural schools: A preliminary, qualitative investigation. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 6(6), 64-74. doi:10.5195/ijt.2014.6155

Mashima, P. A., & Doarn, C. R. (2008). Overview of telehealth activities in speech-language pathology. Telemedicine and e-Health, 14, 1101-1117.

McCormack, J., Harrison, L. J., McLeod, S., & McAllister, L. (2011). A nationally representative study of the association between communication impairment at 4-5 years and children's life activities at 7-9 years. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 1328-1348. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0155)

McCormack, J., & Verdon, S. E. (2015). Mapping speech pathology services to developmentally vulnerable and at-risk communities using the Australian Early Development Census. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 273-286. doi:10.3109/17549507.2015.1034175

Owens, R. E. (2012). Language development: An introduction (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.

Park, S., Freeman, J., Middleton, C., Allen, M., Eckermann, R., & Everson, R. (2015, 5-8 Jan. 2015). The Multi-layers of digital exclusion in rural Australia. Paper presented at the 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

Reynolds, A. L., Vick, J. L., & Haak, N. J. (2009). Telehealth applications in speech-language pathology: A modified narrative review. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 15, 310-316. doi:10.1258/jtt.2009.081215

Ruben, R. J. (2000). Redefining the survival of the fittest: Communication disorders in the 21st century. Laryngoscope, 110, 241-241. doi:10.1097/00005537-200002010-00010

Schoon, I., Parsons, S., Rush, R., & Law, J. (2010). Children's language ability and psychosocial development: A 29-year follow-up study. Pediatrics, 126(1), e73-80. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-3282

Sicotte, C., Lehoux, P., Fortier-Blanc, J., & Leblanc, Y. (2003). Feasibility and outcome evaluation of a telemedicine application in speech-language pathology. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 9, 253-258. doi:10.1258/135763303769211256

Speech Pathology Australia [SPA]. (2014). Telepractice in Speech Pathology [Position Statement]. Retrieved from http://www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au/

Taylor, O. D., Armfield, N. R., Dodrill, P., & Smith, A. C. (2014). A review of the efficacy and effectiveness of using telehealth for paediatric speech and language assessment. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 20, 405-412. doi:10.1177/1357633X14552388

Theodoros, D. (2012). A new era in speech-language pathology practice: Innovation and diversification. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14, 189-199. doi:10.3109/17549507.2011.639390

Whitehouse, A. J., Watt, H. J., Line, E. A., & Bishop, D. V. (2009). Adult psychosocial outcomes of children with specific language impairment, pragmatic language impairment and autism. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 44, 511-528. doi:10.1080/13682820802708098

Downloads

Published

2017-06-29

How to Cite

Wales, D., Skinner, L., & Hayman, M. (2017). The Efficacy of Telehealth-Delivered Speech and Language Intervention for Primary School-Age Children: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 9(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2017.6219

Issue

Vol 9, No 1: Spring 2017

Section

Systematic Review of Research

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.