Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026
Rhotic Generalization Is More Rapid in Biofeedback Than Motor-Based Treatment for Residual Speech Sound Disorder: Secondary Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Preston Jonathan L, Hitchcock Elaine R, Leece Megan C, Benway Nina R, Hill Jennifer, McAllister Tara
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study examined the effects of visual biofeedback approaches and nonbiofeedback motor-based treatment on generalization outcomes following speech therapy for children with residual speech sound disorders (RSSDs).
METHOD: A total of 108 children aged 9-15 years with RSSD affecting American English /ɹ/ were randomly assigned to receive 19 motor-based speech treatment sessions, with or without visual biofeedback (divided into ultrasound or visual-acoustic biofeedback). The treatment included practice designed to implement several motor learning principles, with task difficulty systematically adjusted based on the child's performance. Children's /ɹ/ accuracy on untreated words before and after treatment was rated as correct or incorrect by lay listeners who were blinded to participant characteristics, treatment conditions, and time points.
RESULTS: The mixed-effects regression model revealed a statistically significant interaction between treatment type and time point. Specifically, both the biofeedback and nonbiofeedback motor-based treatment groups made progress over time, but the amount of generalization to untreated words was significantly greater in the biofeedback condition than in the motor-based treatment. In a subanalysis comparing biofeedback types, greater generalization was observed following ultrasound biofeedback than visual-acoustic biofeedback, although this effect was strongest at one treatment site.
DISCUSSION: This randomized controlled trial found that adding biofeedback to motor-based treatment can increase the rate of accurate production of the American English /ɹ/ in untreated words.
METHOD: A total of 108 children aged 9-15 years with RSSD affecting American English /ɹ/ were randomly assigned to receive 19 motor-based speech treatment sessions, with or without visual biofeedback (divided into ultrasound or visual-acoustic biofeedback). The treatment included practice designed to implement several motor learning principles, with task difficulty systematically adjusted based on the child's performance. Children's /ɹ/ accuracy on untreated words before and after treatment was rated as correct or incorrect by lay listeners who were blinded to participant characteristics, treatment conditions, and time points.
RESULTS: The mixed-effects regression model revealed a statistically significant interaction between treatment type and time point. Specifically, both the biofeedback and nonbiofeedback motor-based treatment groups made progress over time, but the amount of generalization to untreated words was significantly greater in the biofeedback condition than in the motor-based treatment. In a subanalysis comparing biofeedback types, greater generalization was observed following ultrasound biofeedback than visual-acoustic biofeedback, although this effect was strongest at one treatment site.
DISCUSSION: This randomized controlled trial found that adding biofeedback to motor-based treatment can increase the rate of accurate production of the American English /ɹ/ in untreated words.