The Importance of Production Frequency in Therapy for Childhood Apraxia of Speech
The Importance of Production Frequency in Therapy for Childhood Apraxia of Speech
复制标题
DOI：
10.1044/1058-0360(2011/09-0005
复制
发表时间：
2011-05-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Gildersleeve-Neumann, Christina Elke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Edeal, Denice Michelle;Gildersleeve-Neumann, Christina Elke
目的：本研究旨在探讨言语训练中言语产生频率的重要性，以确定在一次治疗过程中，更多地练习言语目标是否会通过对未经训练的单词的泛化来促进运动学习。方法：对两名儿童言语失用儿童进行交替治疗AB设计，两种治疗方法的产生频率不同。较高的生产频率处理需要在15min内生产100+次，而中频处理需要在同一时间段内生产30-40次。其中一名儿童每周治疗3次，共11周；另一名儿童每周治疗两次，共5周。在每个治疗阶段结束时，给予5分钟的探针以确定是否发生了泛化。结果：两组儿童均有不同程度的学习成绩和学习成绩。结果：两组儿童的各项指标均有不同程度的改善，但训练频次越高的儿童获得目标的速度越快，训练中的成绩越好，对未经训练的试题的概括性越强。结论：两种治疗方案均有效，但频繁、高强度的言语训练可使2名儿童的言语失用为主要沟通障碍，治疗反应更快。
Purpose: This study explores the importance of production frequency during speech therapy to determine whether more practice of speech targets leads to increased performance within a treatment session, as well as to motor learning, in the form of generalization to untrained words.Method: Two children with childhood apraxia of speech were treated with an alternating treatment AB design, with production frequency differing in the 2 treatments. The higher production frequency treatment required 100+ productions in 15 min, while the moderate-frequency treatment required 30-40 productions in the same time period. One child was treated 3 times weekly for 11 weeks; the other child was treated twice weekly for 5 weeks. At the conclusion of each treatment phase, 5 min of probes were administered to determine whether generalization had occurred. Maintenance data to measure performance and learning were collected after a break from treatment.Results: Both children showed improvement on all targets; however, the targets with the higher production frequency treatment were acquired faster, evidenced by better in-session performance and greater generalization to untrained probes.Conclusions: Both treatment designs were effective, though frequent and intense practice of speech resulted in more rapid response to treatment in 2 children whose primary communication difficulty was childhood apraxia of speech.