Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2014
Group lidcombe program treatment for early stuttering: a randomized controlled trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Arnott Simone, Onslow Mark, O'Brian Sue, Packman Ann, Jones Mark, Block Susan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study adds to the Lidcombe Program evidence base by comparing individual and group treatment of preschoolers who stutter.
METHOD: A randomized controlled trial of 54 preschoolers was designed to establish whether group delivery outcomes were not inferior to the individual model. The group arm used a rolling group model, in which a new member entered an existing group each time a vacancy became available. Assessments were conducted prerandomization and 9 months and 18 months postrandomization.
RESULTS: There was no evidence of a difference between treatment arms for measures of weeks or clinic visits required, percent syllables stuttered, or parent severity ratings. However, children in the group arm consumed around half the number of speech-language pathologist hours compared with children treated individually. In addition, children in the group progressed more quickly after the treating speech-language pathologist became more practiced with the group model, suggesting the group results are conservative estimates.
CONCLUSIONS: Group delivery of the Lidcombe Program is an efficacious alternative to the individual model. Parents responded favorably to the group model, and the treating speech-language pathologists found group treatment to be more taxing but clinically gratifying.
METHOD: A randomized controlled trial of 54 preschoolers was designed to establish whether group delivery outcomes were not inferior to the individual model. The group arm used a rolling group model, in which a new member entered an existing group each time a vacancy became available. Assessments were conducted prerandomization and 9 months and 18 months postrandomization.
RESULTS: There was no evidence of a difference between treatment arms for measures of weeks or clinic visits required, percent syllables stuttered, or parent severity ratings. However, children in the group arm consumed around half the number of speech-language pathologist hours compared with children treated individually. In addition, children in the group progressed more quickly after the treating speech-language pathologist became more practiced with the group model, suggesting the group results are conservative estimates.
CONCLUSIONS: Group delivery of the Lidcombe Program is an efficacious alternative to the individual model. Parents responded favorably to the group model, and the treating speech-language pathologists found group treatment to be more taxing but clinically gratifying.