Enabling new articulatory gestures in children with persistent speech sound disorders using ultrasound visual biofeedback

Joanne Cleland, James M. Scobbie, Zoe Roxburgh, Cornelia Heyde, Alan Wrench

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated ultrasound visual biofeedback treatment for teaching new articulations to children with a wide variety of speech sound disorders. It was hypothesized that motor-based intervention incorporating ultrasound would lead to rapid acquisition of a range of target lingual gestures with generalization to untreated words. Method: Twenty children aged 6–15 years with a range of mild to severe speech disorders affecting a variety of lingual targets enrolled in a case series with replication. Of these, 15 children completed the intervention. All of the children presented with a variety of errors. We therefore employed a target selection strategy to treat the most frequent lingual error. These individual speech targets were treated using ultrasound visual biofeedback as part of ten to twelve 1-hr intervention sessions. The primary outcome measure was percentage of target segments correct in untreated wordlists. Results: Six children were treated for velar fronting; 3 children, for postalveolar fronting; 2 children, for backing alveolars to pharyngeal or glottal place; 1 child, for debuccalization (production of all onsets as [h]); 1 child, for vowel merger; and 2 children, for lateralized sibilants. Ten achieved the new articulation in the 1st or 2nd session of intervention, despite no children being readily stimulable for their target articulation before intervention. In terms of generalization, effect sizes for percentage of target segments correct ranged from no effect (5 children), small effect (1 child), medium effect (4 children), and large effect (5 children). Conclusions: Ultrasound visual biofeedback can be used to treat a wide range of lingual errors in children with various speech sound disorders, from mild to severe. Visual feedback may be useful for establishing new articulations; however, generalization is more variable.

LanguageEnglish
Pages229-246
Number of pages18
JournalJournal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research
Volume62
Issue number2
Early online date2 May 2019
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2 May 2019

Fingerprint

Gestures
Tongue
Biofeedback (Psychology)
Speech Sound Disorder
Articulatory Gestures
Ultrasound
Speech Sound Disorders
Speech Disorders
Sensory Feedback
speech disorder
merger

Keywords

  • ultrasound
  • speech sound disorders
  • articulation
  • biofeedback

Cite this

@article{1d233a22eaaf4567b097b880bb18c6d9,
title = "Enabling new articulatory gestures in children with persistent speech sound disorders using ultrasound visual biofeedback",
abstract = "Purpose: This study evaluated ultrasound visual biofeedback treatment for teaching new articulations to children with a wide variety of speech sound disorders. It was hypothesized that motor-based intervention incorporating ultrasound would lead to rapid acquisition of a range of target lingual gestures with generalization to untreated words. Method: Twenty children aged 6–15 years with a range of mild to severe speech disorders affecting a variety of lingual targets enrolled in a case series with replication. Of these, 15 children completed the intervention. All of the children presented with a variety of errors. We therefore employed a target selection strategy to treat the most frequent lingual error. These individual speech targets were treated using ultrasound visual biofeedback as part of ten to twelve 1-hr intervention sessions. The primary outcome measure was percentage of target segments correct in untreated wordlists. Results: Six children were treated for velar fronting; 3 children, for postalveolar fronting; 2 children, for backing alveolars to pharyngeal or glottal place; 1 child, for debuccalization (production of all onsets as [h]); 1 child, for vowel merger; and 2 children, for lateralized sibilants. Ten achieved the new articulation in the 1st or 2nd session of intervention, despite no children being readily stimulable for their target articulation before intervention. In terms of generalization, effect sizes for percentage of target segments correct ranged from no effect (5 children), small effect (1 child), medium effect (4 children), and large effect (5 children). Conclusions: Ultrasound visual biofeedback can be used to treat a wide range of lingual errors in children with various speech sound disorders, from mild to severe. Visual feedback may be useful for establishing new articulations; however, generalization is more variable.",
keywords = "ultrasound, speech sound disorders, articulation, biofeedback",
author = "Joanne Cleland and Scobbie, {James M.} and Zoe Roxburgh and Cornelia Heyde and Alan Wrench",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-17-0360",
language = "English",
volume = "62",
pages = "229--246",
journal = "Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research",
issn = "1092-4388",
number = "2",

}

Enabling new articulatory gestures in children with persistent speech sound disorders using ultrasound visual biofeedback. / Cleland, Joanne; Scobbie, James M.; Roxburgh, Zoe; Heyde, Cornelia; Wrench, Alan.

In: Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, Vol. 62, No. 2, 02.05.2019, p. 229-246.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Enabling new articulatory gestures in children with persistent speech sound disorders using ultrasound visual biofeedback

AU - Cleland, Joanne

AU - Scobbie, James M.

AU - Roxburgh, Zoe

AU - Heyde, Cornelia

AU - Wrench, Alan

PY - 2019/5/2

Y1 - 2019/5/2

N2 - Purpose: This study evaluated ultrasound visual biofeedback treatment for teaching new articulations to children with a wide variety of speech sound disorders. It was hypothesized that motor-based intervention incorporating ultrasound would lead to rapid acquisition of a range of target lingual gestures with generalization to untreated words. Method: Twenty children aged 6–15 years with a range of mild to severe speech disorders affecting a variety of lingual targets enrolled in a case series with replication. Of these, 15 children completed the intervention. All of the children presented with a variety of errors. We therefore employed a target selection strategy to treat the most frequent lingual error. These individual speech targets were treated using ultrasound visual biofeedback as part of ten to twelve 1-hr intervention sessions. The primary outcome measure was percentage of target segments correct in untreated wordlists. Results: Six children were treated for velar fronting; 3 children, for postalveolar fronting; 2 children, for backing alveolars to pharyngeal or glottal place; 1 child, for debuccalization (production of all onsets as [h]); 1 child, for vowel merger; and 2 children, for lateralized sibilants. Ten achieved the new articulation in the 1st or 2nd session of intervention, despite no children being readily stimulable for their target articulation before intervention. In terms of generalization, effect sizes for percentage of target segments correct ranged from no effect (5 children), small effect (1 child), medium effect (4 children), and large effect (5 children). Conclusions: Ultrasound visual biofeedback can be used to treat a wide range of lingual errors in children with various speech sound disorders, from mild to severe. Visual feedback may be useful for establishing new articulations; however, generalization is more variable.

AB - Purpose: This study evaluated ultrasound visual biofeedback treatment for teaching new articulations to children with a wide variety of speech sound disorders. It was hypothesized that motor-based intervention incorporating ultrasound would lead to rapid acquisition of a range of target lingual gestures with generalization to untreated words. Method: Twenty children aged 6–15 years with a range of mild to severe speech disorders affecting a variety of lingual targets enrolled in a case series with replication. Of these, 15 children completed the intervention. All of the children presented with a variety of errors. We therefore employed a target selection strategy to treat the most frequent lingual error. These individual speech targets were treated using ultrasound visual biofeedback as part of ten to twelve 1-hr intervention sessions. The primary outcome measure was percentage of target segments correct in untreated wordlists. Results: Six children were treated for velar fronting; 3 children, for postalveolar fronting; 2 children, for backing alveolars to pharyngeal or glottal place; 1 child, for debuccalization (production of all onsets as [h]); 1 child, for vowel merger; and 2 children, for lateralized sibilants. Ten achieved the new articulation in the 1st or 2nd session of intervention, despite no children being readily stimulable for their target articulation before intervention. In terms of generalization, effect sizes for percentage of target segments correct ranged from no effect (5 children), small effect (1 child), medium effect (4 children), and large effect (5 children). Conclusions: Ultrasound visual biofeedback can be used to treat a wide range of lingual errors in children with various speech sound disorders, from mild to severe. Visual feedback may be useful for establishing new articulations; however, generalization is more variable.

KW - ultrasound

KW - speech sound disorders

KW - articulation

KW - biofeedback

UR - https://jslhr.pubs.asha.org/

U2 - 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-17-0360

DO - 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-17-0360

M3 - Article

VL - 62

SP - 229

EP - 246

JO - Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research

T2 - Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research

JF - Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research

SN - 1092-4388

IS - 2

ER -