TY - JOUR
T1 - Bang for your buck
T2 - A single-case experimental design study of practice amount and distribution in treatment for childhood apraxia of speech
AU - Maas, Edwin
AU - Gildersleeve-Neumann, Christina
AU - Jakielski, Kathy
AU - Kovacs, Nicolette
AU - Stoeckel, Ruth
AU - Vradelis, Helen
AU - Welsh, Mackenzie
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by a generous grant from the Childhood Apraxia of Speech Association of North America (currently known as Apraxia Kids; principal investigator: Maas). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of Apraxia Kids. We thank Apraxia Kids (formerly known as Childhood Apraxia of Speech Association of North America) for funding. We also thank Carolina Echeverri, Talia Irgangladen, Leanne Long, Brian Kulsik, and Sarah Rosenberg for their help with data and fidelity analyses; the SLP for evaluating the children and administering the treatment; and Kyra Skoog for computing complexity scores for target stimuli. Most importantly, we thank the children and their families for their time and participation. Portions of this research were conducted as part of two master’s theses (by Nicolette Kovacs and Mackenzie Welsh). Preliminary data were presented at the American Speech- Language-Hearing Association Convention (Los Angeles, CA, November 2017).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
PY - 2019/9
Y1 - 2019/9
N2 - Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine 2 aspects of treatment intensity in treatment for childhood apraxia of speech (CAS): practice amount and practice distribution. Method: Using an alternating-treatments single-subject design with multiple baselines, we compared high versus low amount of practice, and massed versus distributed practice, in 6 children with CAS. Conditions were manipulated in the context of integral stimulation treatment. Changes in perceptual accuracy, scored by blinded analysts, were quantified with effect sizes. Results: Four children showed an advantage for high amount of practice, 1 showed an opposite effect, and 1 showed no condition difference. For distribution, 4 children showed a clear advantage for massed over distributed practice post treatment; 1 showed an opposite pattern, and 1 showed no clear difference. Follow-up revealed a similar pattern. All children demonstrated treatment effects (larger gains for treated than untreated items). Conclusions: High practice amount and massed practice were associated with more robust speech motor learning in most children with CAS, compared to low amount and distributed practice, respectively. Variation in effects across children warrants further research to determine factors that predict optimal treatment conditions. Finally, this study adds to the evidence base supporting the efficacy of integral stimulation treatment for CAS.
AB - Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine 2 aspects of treatment intensity in treatment for childhood apraxia of speech (CAS): practice amount and practice distribution. Method: Using an alternating-treatments single-subject design with multiple baselines, we compared high versus low amount of practice, and massed versus distributed practice, in 6 children with CAS. Conditions were manipulated in the context of integral stimulation treatment. Changes in perceptual accuracy, scored by blinded analysts, were quantified with effect sizes. Results: Four children showed an advantage for high amount of practice, 1 showed an opposite effect, and 1 showed no condition difference. For distribution, 4 children showed a clear advantage for massed over distributed practice post treatment; 1 showed an opposite pattern, and 1 showed no clear difference. Follow-up revealed a similar pattern. All children demonstrated treatment effects (larger gains for treated than untreated items). Conclusions: High practice amount and massed practice were associated with more robust speech motor learning in most children with CAS, compared to low amount and distributed practice, respectively. Variation in effects across children warrants further research to determine factors that predict optimal treatment conditions. Finally, this study adds to the evidence base supporting the efficacy of integral stimulation treatment for CAS.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072511370&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072511370&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-S-18-0212
DO - 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-S-18-0212
M3 - Article
C2 - 31425660
AN - SCOPUS:85072511370
VL - 62
SP - 3160
EP - 3182
JO - Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders
JF - Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders
SN - 1092-4388
IS - 9
ER -