The most commonly used intervention approaches identified in the current survey (i.e., speech discrimination, conventional minimal pairs and phonological awareness therapy) may be used eclectically by SLTs, which could impact upon the effectiveness and efficiency of treatment for phonological impairment. The current study also highlighted that almost half the participants always/often used traditional articulation therapy to remediate phonological impairment, even though this approach has been found to be less effective for this difficulty. Additionally, it appears that the currently provided intervention intensity for phonological impairment in the UK is significantly lower than what is indicated in the literature. Therefore, a research-practice gap exists for SLTs in the UK working with children with phonological impairment.

Purpose: To explore the reasons behind speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') current clinical practices (intervention and intensity provision) for children (0-18 years) with phonological impairment.Method: Three focus groups each with five SLPs and six 1:1 interviews with SLP managers from one region of the UK (n=21) were carried out. A thematic analysis was undertaken.Results: SLPs often used an eclectic mix of familiar approaches with easily-accessible therapy materials. SLPs only reported deviating from their core approach if the child did not progress in therapy. Mixed responses were gathered on the perceived feasibility of transferring evidence based intervention intensities into clinical practice. The importance of parents to increase intensity provision at home was noted. Barriers to SLPs' evidence-based decision-making included: time; confidence levels; service-related restrictions and; difficulty replicating research in practice. Having peer support and access to decision-making pathways and manualised intervention protocols were considered ways to overcome these barriers. Conclusion:There is a research-practice gap in which SLPs' current practices are driven by organisational factors, their own preferences and child-specific factors. To narrow this gap, SLPs suggested the development of time-saving, evidence-based tools.