Principles of Motor Learning in Treatment of Motor Speech Disorders

Maas, Edwin; Robin, Donald A.; Hula, Shannon N. Austermann; Freedman, Skott E.; Wulf, Gabriele; Ballard, Kirrie J.; Schmidt, Richard A.

doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2008/025)

Cited by 474 publications

(429 citation statements)

References 136 publications

(197 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

397

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A custom-designed software, Challenge-R (McAllister Byun, Hitchcock, & Ortiz, 2014) was used to implement a system of adaptive treatment difficulty in accordance with principles of motor learning (e.g., Maas et al, 2008). At the time of testing, this software was operated on a separate computer, but in future versions it will be incorporated directly into the staRt app.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Biofeedback is a form of detailed knowledge of performance feedback (Volin, 1998). As such, it is predicted to facilitate the acquisition of new motor skills (Maas et al, 2008;Preston, Brick, & Landi, 2013), although its impact on long-term retention and generalization may be neutral or even detrimental (Hodges & Franks, 2001;Maas et al, 2008). It has also been suggested that biofeedback may have its effect by encouraging speakers to adopt an external direction of attentional focus , which has been found to speed the acquisition of motor skills in nonspeech contexts (see discussion in Maas et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rationale for biofeedback is rooted in the literature investigating principles of motor learning, which hypothesizes that different conditions of practice and feedback can impact the acquisition and generalization of new motor (Bislick, Weir, Spencer, Kendall, & Yorkston, 2012;Maas et al, 2008). Biofeedback is a form of detailed knowledge of performance feedback (Volin, 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several potential improvements are suggested by Hannah's responses to survey questions and the authors' observations over the course of her treatment. Because frequent practice across varying contexts may enhance generalization gains (e.g., Maas et al, 2008), we plan to develop a module for home practice. To ensure that home practice reinforces the child's new and more accurate production patterns, users will be able to record their home practice sessions and transmit them to the clinician for scoring.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Enhancing Intervention for Residual Rhotic Errors Via App-Delivered Biofeedback: A Case Study

Byun

Campbell

Carey

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Recent research suggests that visual-acoustic biofeedback can be an effective treatment for residual speech errors, but adoption remains limited due to barriers including high cost and lack of familiarity with the technology. This case study reports results from the first participant to complete a course of visual-acoustic biofeedback using a not-for-profit iOS app, Speech Therapist's App for /r/ Treatment. Method App-based biofeedback treatment for rhotic misarticulation was provided in weekly 30-min sessions for 20 weeks. Within-treatment progress was documented using clinician perceptual ratings and acoustic measures. Generalization gains were assessed using acoustic measures of word probes elicited during baseline, treatment, and maintenance sessions. Results Both clinician ratings and acoustic measures indicated that the participant significantly improved her rhotic production accuracy in trials elicited during treatment sessions. However, these gains did not transfer to generalization probes. Conclusions This study provides a proof-of-concept demonstration that app-based biofeedback is a viable alternative to costlier dedicated systems. Generalization of gains to contexts without biofeedback remains a challenge that requires further study. App-delivered biofeedback could enable clinician–research partnerships that would strengthen the evidence base while providing enhanced treatment for children with residual rhotic errors. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.5116318

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Enhancing Intervention for Residual Rhotic Errors Via App-Delivered Biofeedback: A Case Study

Byun

Campbell

Carey

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Motor learning is a set of internal procedures resulting in permanent alterations in movement and response skills through practice (Kim, LaPointe & Stierwalt 2012;Maas et al 2008). A motor skill reflects a task that has a specific purpose or goal to achieve (Magill & Anderson 2013).…”

Section: Motor Learning and Motor Learning Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmented feedback in autistic disorder

Geertsema

McDonald

Merwe

et al. 2017

SAJCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<div class="WordSection1"><p>Children with autistic disorder (AD) display atypical eye contact and struggle with the social imitation of eye contact. Impaired social imitation may be indicative of disruptions in motor learning processes. The application of specific motor learning principles, such as external feedback, may suggest which variables will result in positive change in eye contact. The study aimed to determine the effects of knowledge of performance (KP) and knowledge of results (KR) as types of feedback on the frequency and duration of elicited and spontaneous eye contact in children with AD. A two-phase multiple-probe, multi-treatment (cross-over), singleparticipant design with a withdrawal component was used. Mixed treatment effects were obtained. Overall effects suggest that KR results in the greatest positive change over a short period of time regarding frequency and duration for both elicited and spontaneous eye contact. This type of feedback seems to be the most effective for spontaneous eye contact. The provision of KP, after elicited and spontaneous eye contact, produced positive effects for duration only. The current Phase 1 evidence suggests that KR (which is goal-directed with fewer additional instructions) may be more beneficial to children with AD. These findings are in accordance with the limb motor learning literature and may therefore support preliminary evidence for disrupted motor learning during eye contact imitation in children with AD.</p></div>

show abstract

Interventions for childhood apraxia of speech

Morgan

Murray

Liégeois

2018

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) affects a child's ability to produce sounds and syllables precisely and consistently, and to produce words and sentences with accuracy and correct speech rhythm. It is a rare condition, affecting only 0.1% of the general population. Consensus has been reached that three core features have diagnostic validity: (1) inconsistent error production on both consonants and vowels across repeated productions of syllables or words; (2) lengthened and impaired coarticulatory transitions between sounds and syllables; and (3) inappropriate prosody (ASHA 2007). A deficit in motor programming or planning is thought to underlie the condition. This means that children know what they would like to say but there is a breakdown in the ability to programme or plan the fine and rapid movements required to accurately produce speech. Children with CAS may also have impairments in one or more of the following areas: non-speech oral motor function, dysarthria, language, phonological production impairment, phonemic awareness or metalinguistic skills and literacy, or combinations of these. High-quality evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is lacking on interventions for CAS. Objectives To assess the efficacy of interventions targeting speech and language in children and adolescents with CAS as delivered by speech and language pathologists/therapists. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, eight other databases and seven trial registers up to April 2017. We searched the reference lists of included reports and requested information on unpublished trials from authors of published studies and other experts as well as information groups in the areas of speech and language therapy/pathology and linguistics. Selection criteria RCTs and quasi-RCTs of children aged 3 to 16 years with CAS diagnosed by a speech and language pathologist/therapist, grouped by treatment types. Data collection and analysis Two review authors (FL, AM) independently assessed titles and abstracts identified from the searches and obtained full-text reports of all potentially relevant articles and assessed these for eligibility. The same two authors extracted data and conducted the 'Risk of bias' and GRADE assessments. One review author (EM) tabulated findings from excluded observational studies (Table 1). 1 Interventions for childhood apraxia of speech (Review)

show abstract

Principles of Motor Learning in Treatment of Motor Speech Disorders

Cited by 474 publications

References 136 publications

Enhancing Intervention for Residual Rhotic Errors Via App-Delivered Biofeedback: A Case Study

Enhancing Intervention for Residual Rhotic Errors Via App-Delivered Biofeedback: A Case Study

Augmented feedback in autistic disorder

Interventions for childhood apraxia of speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About