Audiology and Speech Pathology - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2
-
ItemExploring the speech and language of individuals with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate: a preliminary report(WILEY, 2019-09)BACKGROUND: Submucous cleft palate (SMCP) has a heterogeneous presentation and is often identified late or misdiagnosed. Diagnosis is prompted by speech, resonance or feeding symptoms associated with velopharyngeal insufficiency. However, the broader impacts of SMCP on communication have rarely been examined and therefore are poorly understood. AIM: To describe the communicative profile of individuals with non-syndromic SMCP by examining speech, language and pragmatics (social language). METHODS & PROCEDURES: Fifteen participants with SMCP aged 5;1-12;8, without a genetic diagnosis, participated in the study. Participants completed standardized assessments examining language, resonance, speech and non-verbal intellect. Parents also completed the Children's Communication Checklist (CCC-2), which provided a measure of overall communicative ability, including pragmatic skills. Formal language outcomes were compared with two cohorts: 36 individuals with overt non-syndromic clefts and 129 individuals with no history of clefting. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Speech intelligibility was reduced secondary to hypernasality, disordered articulation and/or impaired phonology (n = 7) in children with SMCP. Poorer overall language outcomes were observed for children with SMCP compared with both those with overt clefts and no history of clefting (p < 0.001). Language scores for children with SMCP ranged from impaired (n = 6) to above the standardized mean (n = 4). Receptive and expressive language performance were independently correlated with non-verbal IQ (p < 0.01). Those with severe language impairment (n = 4) also had borderline or impaired non-verbal IQ. Parents reported that speech and semantics were the most affected sub-domains of communication, while scores were the highest for the initiation domain. Speech and language skills were correlated strongly with pragmatics (r = 0.877, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Overall, performance was variable within the SMCP group across speech, language and pragmatic assessments. In addition to well-documented speech difficulties, children with SMCP may have language or pragmatic impairments, suggesting that further neurodevelopmental influences may be at play. As such, for individuals with SMCP, additional clinical screening of language and pragmatic abilities may be required to ensure accurate diagnosis and guide both cleft and non-cleft related therapy programmes.
-
ItemReceptive and expressive language characteristics of school-aged children with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate(WILEY, 2018-09)BACKGROUND: Research investigating language skills in school-aged children with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate is sparse. Past studies focus on younger populations, lack key comparisons to demographically matched control cohorts or explore language as a component of broader academic skills. Trends of existing studies suggest that affected children may perform at a lower level compared with typically developing peers. AIMS: To examine the receptive and expressive language skills of middle-school-aged children with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) and cleft palate only (CP). Additionally, to explore the language skills of children with clefts compared with a non-cleft control group. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Thirty-seven participants with orofacial clefts (aged 7;1-14;1 years) participated in the study: 19 with CLP (10 males; 9 females) and 18 with CP (8 males; 10 females). A non-cleft comparison group consisted of 129 individuals matched on age, sex and maternal education level. Participants completed formal language (Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, Fourth Edition) and non-verbal intellectual measurements (Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence-WASI). Demographic and developmental information was obtained via parental interview. Further clinical details (e.g., surgery; hearing status) were extracted from patient medical files. Cleft and non-cleft language and non-verbal IQ outcomes were reported separately. Language outcomes were then compared between groups. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Participants with clefts achieved core (mean = 103.31, standard deviation (SD) = 10.31), receptive (mean = 102.51, SD = 11.60) and expressive (mean = 102.89, SD = 12.17) language index scores within the normative average range. A total of 14.1% and 17.8% of the cleft and non-cleft groups respectively had impairment (i.e., ≥ 1.25 SD below the mean) in one or more language domains. No significant differences were found in the three language index scores between cleft and non-cleft groups. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This study is the first formally to examine language skills alongside non-verbal IQ in school-aged children with clefts compared with a large matched non-cleft population. Results suggest that health professionals should evaluate each child as they present and not assume that a child with non-syndromic CLP or CP will also have co-occurring language difficulties. Where language falls in the average range, these skills can be harnessed to support areas of difficulty often associated with orofacial clefting, such as speech.