Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 6(6), p. 1809-1819, 2021

DOI: 10.1044/2021_persp-21-00131

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Speech-Language Pathology Provision During the COVID-19 Pandemic for Children Born With Cleft Palate in the United Kingdom—Parent/Caregiver Perspectives and Experiences

Journal article published in 2021 by Lucy Southby ORCID, Sam Harding ORCID, Amy Davies ORCID, Matthew Fell ORCID, Yvonne Wren ORCID
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine parent/caregiver perspectives and experiences of speech-language pathology provision during the COVID-19 pandemic for children born with cleft palate. Method: An online questionnaire to parents of children born with cleft palate asked about delays and changes to speech-language pathology provision during the first U.K. national lockdown. Parents were also asked their views on the effectiveness of online speech-language pathology provision. Analysis considered variation in speech-language pathology provision by region. Chi-square and Mann–Whitney U tests examined associations between speech-language pathology provision and socioeconomic status and child age. Free text responses were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Results: Three hundred fifty-six (39.3%) children were receiving speech-language pathology intervention before the first national lockdown. A further 49 (9.0%) were due to start speech-language pathology intervention during the lockdown. Speech-language pathology provision varied both nationally and within smaller geographical regions. Overall, 146 (42.6%) children continued to receive speech-language pathology and 197 (57.4%) had intervention delayed. There was no association between delayed speech-language pathology and socioeconomic status. Older children were more likely to experience delayed speech-language pathology provision ( p = .004). Qualitative analysis revealed concerns about access to speech-language pathology, challenges with adequate devices to access online provision, technological problems, and child engagement in online provision. Parents reported online provision as being “better than nothing.” Conclusions: Parents/caregivers reported delays to speech-language pathology provision during the first lockdown, but this varied geographically and was more prevalent for older children. Concerns about access to speech-language pathology provision were raised, including challenges regarding online provision. Follow-on work will consider the impact of the delays experienced on longer term outcomes.