A Scoping Review of Interventions to Supplement Spoken Communication for Children with Limited Speech or Language Skills

Abstract

BackgroundAugmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) is used for treating children with severe disorders of speech-language production and/or comprehension. Various strategies are used, but research and debate on their efficacy have remained limited to a specific area and have rarely reached the general medical community.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate outcomes of AAC interventions in children with limited speech or language skills.MethodsSearches were conducted (up to December 2012) in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, DARE, and Cochrane Library databases. Furthermore, relevant journals were searched by hand. References from identified studies were examined. Only RCTs were considered. Trial quality was assessed according to a standardized and validated set of criteria.ResultsFourteen of 1661 retrieved papers met inclusion criteria. A total of 666 children were included in the review and 7 papers involved only children <5 years old. Papers were of average quality and all but one had been published during the previous 10 years by one of 8 research groups, 5 of which from the United States. Seven studies directly addressed AAC use by children with different disabilities. Seven studies enrolled typically developing children: 5 evaluated the use of AAC technologies by children without disabilities in order to obtain results that could be used to improve interventions in peers with disabilities, and 2 evaluated peers’ attitudes towards children who used AAC. Both interventions and outcome measures varied widely between studies. Overall findings demonstrate the effectiveness of the AAC interventions considered, but the focus on RCTs alone appears too restrictive.ConclusionsSolid evidence of the positive effects of AAC interventions in children with severe communication disorders must be generated, and different methods are needed besides RCTs. Moreover, it is important that knowledge, research, and debate extend to the medical community in order to ensure clinically effective AAC provision for these children (and their parents).

Functional Status of People with Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…22.2% of the children with ASD use alternative and augmentative technology, which is not used by those in the control group (p = 0.002). This is confirmed in the study by Costantino and Bonati (2014) and their findings of positive effects of alternative and augmentative technology for people with speech difficulties. They help children to convey their needs and desires in appropriate and positive ways, which improves the understanding between the interlocutor and the person with ASD, and thus reduces stress levels.…”

Improving Writing a Descriptive Paragraph of Elementary School Students through Picture-Based Mind Mapping

“…Writing skills are needed in various areas of life. Language skills are divided into two main parts, namely spoken language skills and written language skills (Costantino & Bonati, 2014;Hayon, 2007). Guided by the purpose of teaching Indonesian, Indonesian needs to be taught from the time a person enters elementary school to university.…”

Efficacy of a novel augmentative and alternative communication system in promoting requesting skills in young children with Autism Spectrum Disorder in India: A pilot study

“…Overall, language and communication are highly culture-specific (Nigam, 2006; Soto & Yu, 2014; Taylor & Clarke, 1994). Nevertheless, AAC systems have typically been designed based on Western sensibilities and cultural norms; moreover they are often available only in the English language (Costantino & Bonati, 2014; Hetzroni & Harris, 1996; McCord & Soto, 2004). Few other research groups have developed AAC apps in languages such as Brazilian Portuguese and Chinese, with content and symbols appropriately contextualized to the native cultural landscape (An et al, 2017; de Oliveira et al, 2016; Genc-Tosun & Kurt, 2017; Mngomesulu et al, 2019; Wepener et al, 2021).…”