Motor speech impairment predicts expressive language in minimally verbal, but not low verbal, individuals with autism spectrum disorder
Motor speech impairment predicts expressive language in minimally verbal, but not low verbal, individuals with autism spectrum disorder
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/2396941519856333
复制
发表时间：
2019-01-01
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Tager-Flusberg, Helen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chenausky, Karen;Brignell, Amanda;Tager-Flusberg, Helen
背景和目的：自闭症谱系障碍患者的发育性运动性言语障碍已被怀疑，但很少系统研究。我们的目的是调查该人群的运动性言语障碍的程度及其与在半结构化语言样本中产生的不同单词数量的关系。方法：对54名低言语和最少言语的个体(4岁；4-18岁；10岁)进行部分言语实践测试，对视频进行编码，以寻找运动性言语障碍的迹象(如儿童言语失用)。结果：出现4组：(1)言语正常(n=12)，(2)非儿童期言语障碍失用症(n=16)，(3)疑似儿童期言语失用症(n=13)，(4)言语发育不足(n=13)。不同群体在非言语言语运动能力、言语产生能力、非言语智商和接受性词汇上存在显著差异。总体而言，只有语音生成能力和接受性词汇才能解释不同单词数量的显著差异。接受性词汇仅在第1组和第2组显著预测不同词数，而言语产生能力仅在第3组和第4组显著预测不同词数。结论和启示：如果我们的研究结果重复，我们的研究结果对于在言语少的自闭症谱系障碍患者中发展急需的口语干预具有重要意义。
Background and aims: Developmental motor speech impairment has been suspected, but rarely systematically examined, in low- and minimally verbal individuals with autism spectrum disorder. We aimed to investigate the extent of motor speech impairment in this population and its relation to number of different words produced during a semi-structured language sample.Methods: Videos of 54 low-verbal and minimally verbal individuals (ages 4;4-18;10) performing portions of a speech praxis test were coded for signs of motor speech impairment (e.g., childhood apraxia of speech). Age, autism spectrum disorder severity, nonspeech oral-motor ability, speech production ability, nonverbal IQ, and receptive vocabulary were compared between groups.Results: Four groups emerged: (1) speech within normal limits (n = 12), (2) non-childhood apraxia of speech impairment (n = 16), (3) suspected childhood apraxia of speech (n = 13), and (4) insufficient speech to rate (n = 13). Groups differed significantly in nonspeech oral-motor ability, speech production ability, nonverbal IQ, and receptive vocabulary. Overall, only speech production ability and receptive vocabulary accounted for significant variance in number of different words. Receptive vocabulary significantly predicted number of different words only in Groups 1 and 2, while speech production ability significantly predicted number of different words only in Groups 3 and 4.Conclusions and implications: If replicated, our findings have important implications for developing much-needed spoken language interventions in minimally verbal individuals with autism spectrum disorder.