In order to improve outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC), it is important to understand what factors contribute to or detract from positive outcomes. Seven young men who had used AAC systems for at least 15 years, their family members, and professionals who had worked with them, participated in the study. Qualitative interviews were used to identify contextual factors that may have contributed (both positively and negatively) to the young men's outcomes. Factors that impeded positive outcomes included: attitude barriers, cultural differences, technological barriers, and service delivery limitations. Contributions to positive outcomes included: community support, parent and family support, personal characteristics, and appropriate and high-quality AAC services. The results are discussed with implications for clinical practice and directions for future research.

People with complex communication needs often require a comprehensive augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) assessment to maximize participation in daily interactions. Assessment of AAC is a complex process and limited practice guidelines exist. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how 25 speech-language pathologists with varying levels of experience approach the AAC assessment process. Participants were classified as either (a) General Practice Speech-Language Pathologists (GPSLPs), (b) AAC Clinical Specialists (AAC-CS), or (c) AAC Research/Policy Specialists (AAC-RS). In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the participants' approach to AAC assessment. The results revealed that GPSLPs approach AAC assessment differently than the AAC-CS and AAC-RS; however, the Specialists reported a similar approach that may help guide the development of practice guidelines for AAC assessment.

This study used a single-subject multiple baseline across participants design to evaluate the effectiveness of a modified picture exchange communication system (PECS) teaching protocol with tactile symbols. Three students (two male, one female) aged 12-17 years who had autism and were blind participated in the study. The instructional program involved three phases. First, each participant learned to exchange a tactile symbol with his/her communication partner to request a preferred item/activity. Second, the distance between the communication partner and the participant was increased. Third, the participants were required to discriminate between two dissimilar tactile symbols. One out of three participants completed all phases of the instructional program. Although the other two participants did not complete the program, they demonstrated improvement from baseline responding rates. This study provided preliminary results that using tactile symbols with strategies from PECS may be an effective method to teach requesting to youth who are blind and have autism.

Over the past 20 years, there have been many advances in the field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Despite these advances, there are no data on the long-term outcomes of AAC interventions. This study evaluated the long-term outcomes for a group of seven young men (ages 19-23 years) who had used AAC systems for at least 15 years and were part of the first generation to have received AAC services since they were in preschool. Outcomes were measured in the following domains: (a) receptive language; (b) reading comprehension; (c) communicative interaction; (d) linguistic complexity; (e) functional communication; (f) educational and vocational achievement; (g) self-determination; and (h) quality of life. The outcomes for the group were diverse, with individual variations across all measures. Evaluation of the data raised many issues surrounding the challenges of outcomes measurement; these are discussed with suggestions for future research.

No abstract