Are You Wearing Your Play-Based Hat Today?

Importance of play

Ever leave the house and not know what to wear? As an early intervention SLP, I wear many hats, and there are days when I’m not sure which hat (or hats) I’ll put on. As any therapist knows, the nature of our job is not just treatment related, but often much more. Of course the hat I wear most often is my speech therapy hat but when I enter the homes of my “kids” every week I sometimes encounter life that requires me to be more than just an SLP.

There is a trust that forms when you regularly enter someone’s home. Families respect you not only as their child’s SLP, but also as a resource for other parenting questions. These questions might require my community resource hat, my fellow parent hat or my support hat. Because the parents of our clients trust us to meet many needs, it is important that when they ask questions or seek guidance we are there to help.

For example, many families today experience a societal pressure to push their child well beyond what is developmentally appropriate. Parents set unrealistic expectations for their children and panic if they feel their child isn’t “keeping up.” I’m concerned when I enter homes filled with obscene piles of toys, a television constantly going and a toddler who manipulates my phone and tablet more skillfully than I do! Through my sessions I model play, in the absence of fancy toys and electronic devices, hoping the parents will realize how simply PLAYING with their child is enough. There’s no better way to achieve developmental milestones and enrich children than through play.

Sometimes my example isn’t enough…well OK, it’s often not enough. So frequently I have a conversation about age-appropriate expectations, age-appropriate toys and what children need most from their parents.

When pondering how to start this conversation, I often find myself asking: What can I do to educate families on the importance of play? What can I say to drive home age-appropriate expectations? What are some of the most important points to stress to the families I serve? Professionally, I branched into owning a business devoted to play, plus I learned about how play is changing and why it matters.

Here are some tips you may find helpful to educate parents about the importance of simple play:

• Remind families that children need unstructured playtime and give specific examples of what is learned when a child does “nothing.” A toddler’s day should consist mostly of unstructured play and opportunities to experience their world with all their senses. Tell parents that this is the best way for their child to learn.

• Share with parents the American Academy of Pediatrics’ recommendation of no screen time before age 2 and only two hours per day for children older than 2. Parents are usually shocked to hear this, but even a television in the background distracts a baby/toddler and can make it more difficult for them to focus and learn.

• Inform parents that babies and toddlers do not truly learn anything from flashcards. The powerful marketing beast can sell just about anything to an anxious parent who wants that best for her child. However, research and experience do not support their use, particularly at such an early age. Share what you know about play-based options for teaching language skills.

• Encourage parents to slow down and follow their instincts. Oftentimes parents know what’s best for their child, but are influenced by outside sources. As professionals, we can reassure parents to trust themselves.

If you are an EI SLP I hope you realize your importance not only in the life of the child you serve, but his family as well. You are appreciated and trusted, so may you guide your families so that they are able to enjoy the miracle of their child to the fullest. Choose your hats wisely and don’t keep all that knowledge about PLAY under your hat. We all have a role in supporting families and enriching children’s lives.

Lacy Morise, MS, CCC-SLP of Berryville, Virginia works for the West Virginia Birth to Three Program as an early intervention therapist. She also owns Milestones & Miracles (with her EI PT bestie, Nicole Sergent, MPT) Read her blog and like her on Facebook, follow her on Twitter @milestonesm and Pinterest

“Cuz You Know I’m All About That Case, Node Trouble”

121114_blogNodes_155849552

Meghan Trainor’s song is so popular that excellent covers are popping up everywhere and I think there is a strong possibility of another definition of “bass” being added to the dictionary by next year. Now, while Meghan has no history of voice issues that I am aware of, others in the spotlight have suffered from vocal pathologies so severe that they have had to cancel tours and even rehabilitate their singing voices for years before performing live again.

Voice care has been in the media recently and I think it is important for clinicians to understand exactly what is going on with these popular cases because it will help them answer tough questions. I am always reading whatever I can get my hands on. I know that most SLP’s and AuD’s out there barely have time to dash to the bathroom during a work day, let alone to thoroughly read a peer-reviewed research study. It is our duty as clinicians to have a strong commitment to lifelong learning because our abilities as competent care providers are supported by the information we can synthesize on the spot. It is always okay to say, “I don’t know,” however, I always feel extra special when I can say: “I read about this last week.”

Not having enough information on a topic usually leads to accusations and rash decision making. I had a client recently ask about the procedure that was performed on Joan Rivers, which ended up causing her death. “Don’t you do that?” she asked. I explained that although I do not biopsy vocal cords, I do look at them with a camera and the patient needs to be awake so he or she can say “eeeeee.” I went on to explain that topical anesthetic is sometimes used when the gag reflex is particularly sensitive, but no patient of mine is ever sedated for an exam. Joan Rivers had some unplanned things happen during her procedure and because her healthcare information is private, just like any patient’s, we are left to read and watch news stories compiled with some facts missing.

Most of us know that Julie Andrews had great success with “The Sound of Music” and “Mary Poppins,” but many might not know that she battled with vocal nodules, also called nodes, in the 1990’s. Speech-Language Pathologists know now that vocal nodules usually respond to behavioral voice therapy without needing surgical intervention. Julie had her nodules removed in 1997, but the surgery left her with the inability to sing. We wonder, as we do in Joan’s case, what actually happened. If Julie had noncancerous nodules and her behaviors were addressed, perhaps surgery wouldn’t have been necessary at all. Nodules shouldn’t come back if the vocally abusive behaviors are replaced with efficient vocal production techniques. We don’t know if Julie had any voice therapy, but we can speculate that she most likely had scar tissue develop where the nodes were removed. Scar tissue inhibits the vocal fold tissue’s elastic properties resulting in pitch breaks or periods of aphonia.

Nodes have also been addressed by mainstream media in the movie “Pitch Perfect.” Chloe tells the Bellas she has vocal nodes in a dramatic scene, but reveals she has continued to sing despite the diagnosis because she loves it so much. We can’t be expected to know every movie or pop-culture reference to our profession, but it helps to be aware so we can connect to younger clients. Chloe’s story is all too familiar. Some clients find it very difficult to follow treatments because their jobs depend on voice use or they are passionate about performing. It is essential to communicate the importance of adhering to all voice therapy recommendations. Explain that while you understand their passion for their craft, you know that they will have more heartache later if they don’t take time to correct behaviors now.

John Mayer very recently opened up on Twitter to discuss his long and emotional struggle with a granuloma. He says, “It’s 2 years to the day that I had my vocal cords paralyzed so they could heal. It took about as long to get all of my voice back. I can’t tell you how good it feels to hit those notes. Especially on new songs. I’m free again. So grateful.” Well done, John. As clinicians, it’s important that we educate our clients about the length of recovery time, especially for professional voice users.

Polyps have plagued singers like Adele and Keith Urban. Adele reportedly used an app on her phone to speak for her while she was on voice rest for her hemorrhagic polyp, but I wonder if she knew about this avatar program. Technology is readily available these days to improve success for any clients on vocal rest. Both performers underwent surgery to correct these conditions, and hopefully some voice therapy too, as polyps and hemorrhages are functionally caused vocal pathologies. There are four different classes of voice disorders: Functional, Neurological, Organic and Idiopathic. With Adele and Keith’s conditions falling under the functional category, voice therapy could reverse bad habits and keep them from developing any future lesions.

Have you ever provided therapy to a famous client? I know you couldn’t tell anyone even if you have, but it’s pretty exciting, right? Sometimes we need a reminder that a high-profile client’s plan of care should be given the same attention as any other on our caseload. It is okay to feel star struck, but remember to remain calm and collected. Any famous clients will thank you for your professionalism and remember how your intervention helped them get back to doing what they love. Trust me on this one.

So whether your patient is red-carpet-ready or your average-Joe, be knowledgeable and treat clients with equal respect and care so you can “bring savvy back” and be “all about that case.

Kristie Knickerbocker, MS, CCC-SLP, is a speech-language pathologist and singing voice specialist in Fort Worth, Texas. She provides voice, swallowing and speech therapy in her own private practice, a tempo Voice Center, LLC. She also lectures on the singing voice to area choirs and students. She belongs to ASHA’s Special Interest Group 3-Voice and Voice Disorders. She keeps a blog on her website at www.atempovoicecenter.com. Follow her on Twitter @atempovoice or like her on Facebook at www.facebook.com/atempovoicecenter.

 

On the Road Again: ASHA Convention and Telepractice

120914blog_206164252

I admit it. I am an ASHA convention regular attendee. I am the SLP you see year after year collecting large yellow tote bags, company pens and my new favorite—nail files. This year, I even lined up to have my professional photo taken for my LinkedIn profile. I take in all that the ASHA convention offers, and my schedule allows, year after year.

One reason why the ASHA convention is so important to me is that I rarely stay in one place very long. I am the spouse of an active duty military officer. Therefore, I move a lot. With each move (eight so far), I’ve attended ASHA with a new job title: Department of Defense school SLP, hospital SLP, staff SLP, Lead SLP… This year, I attended ASHA as an SLP that works via telepractice. I deliver services and perform assessments via an online, custom built platform. I’m several states away from my students but I am licensed in the state where they reside and the state in which I reside. Using my home computer(s), a headset, webcam and high-speed internet connection with plenty of bandwidth, I treat, assess and collaborate with other SLPs, school staff and parents daily.

At this year’s convention, I encountered some surprising conversations regarding telepractice. I was met with responses ranging from: “Telepractice. I’m not so sure how I feel about that,” to “Yes, I’ve been looking into doing that. How does it work?” When embarking on a career in telepractice as a service delivery model, I was skeptical too. Was it ethical, effective and authorized? After researching ASHA’s rules and state bylaws, I put my feet in the water. That was four years ago.

During the ASHA convention, I was pleased to attend an increasing number of sessions focused on telepractice. However, these sessions highlighted the work and research still to be done to prove the effectiveness of telepractice as a service delivery model (especially with regards to culturally and linguistically diverse populations).

I still wonder, does an increase in sessions and visibility at the ASHA convention translate to increased acceptance/adoption by SLPs on the ground?

Telepractice is established and has been used in the medical field for more than 40 years. The American Telemedicine Association states that “telemedicine is the use of medical information exchanged from one site to another via electronic communications to improve a patient’s clinical health status. Telemedicine includes a variety of applications including two-way videos, smart phones, tablets, wireless tools and other forms of technology.” According to ATA, “the use of telemedicine has spread rapidly and is now becoming integrated into the ongoing operations of hospitals, specialty departments, home health agencies and private physician offices as well as consumers’ homes and workplaces.”

I am looking forward to next year’s ASHA convention in Denver. I am already wondering about the sessions, networking opportunities and of course the pens and highlighters. Most of all, I’m looking forward to attending ASHA again as a SLP working via telepractice and the discussions that will surely follow.

Lesley Edwards-Gaither , MA, CCC-SLP, is a Speech-Language Pathologist in the Washington D.C. area.  She is a Lead SLP with PresenceLearning and an affiliate of Special Interest Group 18, Telepractice. She can be reached at legaitherslp@gmail.com

 

Collaboration Corner: 5 Take-Aways to Support AAC, Apps and Language

TEchnology and augmentative and alternative communication

This past month, my colleague Sean Sweeney (AKA @speechtechie) and I had the opportunity to join forces and write about AAC, apps and literacy development. Our article will be in the next issue of SIG 12: Perspectives in Augmentative and Alternative Communication.

This gave us a great opportunity to discuss how AAC users can benefit from apps to enhance treatment outcomes. Here are five highlights:

Feature matching is important: When choosing AAC or apps for learning, the tool must meet the needs of the user. For AAC, this includes the size, layout and physical accessibility of features to maximize independent use. For apps, this includes Sean’s FIVES criteria, which examines the context, appropriateness, accessibility and therapeutic considerations for learning. Just like any other tool in your kit, if it isn’t a good match then opportunities for communication or learning are potentially lost.

Make CORE align with the CORE: Using generative language formats, including core and fringe word vocabulary, benefits the student two-fold: building in opportunities for language growth throughout the day, while also meeting those pesky Common Core Standards. For example, a first grade ELA standard CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.1.1.c, “Use singular and plural nouns with matching verbs in basic sentences.” Using core vocabulary allows the student to meet this standard through basic sentence construction activities. A first grader may enjoy learning this through the “Collins Big Cat” series, a free app that reads stories out loud and then has the option of the student recording his voice (or in this case, synthesized voice). The app also has a more interactive component, which allows the student to build scenes and narrate his own version of the story.

Apps and AAC are powerful together: Students love the interactive nature of apps. “Toca Hair Salon” is a highly interactive hair salon studio allowing students to describe how they are going to cut, color or otherwise coif the animal or person of choice. Another simple app, “Pogg,” is a cute alien that hops, sings and performs other actions, all at your student’s direction during a session. Beyond paper flashcards, the apps give students immediate reinforcement, so then work feels less like work.

Separate communication tools from other tools: If you are going to use apps and AAC at the same time, one practical solution is to use separate tools. Toggling between apps and AAC is cumbersome, and slow session momentum. In addition, having separate systems prevents the user from confusing a communication device with other technology, which is an important distinction. If your tools look the same, change the colors of the cases. If you have students that like to surf and press that home key, enable guided access so that only the AAC app is available.

Model, model, model through apps and AAC: Finally, apps provide the opportunity to model AAC live, and in unpredictable ways. You have more opportunities to explore and learn together. Don’t have curling iron as a fringe vocabulary item when using your “Toca Hair Salon” app (it’s not there, believe me)? Show your student how you can give clues to what you mean and talk it through using what is available on your AAC: “Let’s see, it’s a tool, it’s hot and it makes your hair curly…what is it?

There’s your abridged version and takeaways…log in to your SIG 12 portal for more info, and to get CEUs….ASHA renewal is right around the corner!

 

 

Reference

Sweeney, S. & Davis, K. (2014). In press. Reading, writing and AAC: Mobile technology strategies for literacy and language development. SIG 12: Perspectives in Augmentative and Alternative Communication. American Speech Language and Hearing Association.

 

 

Kerry J. Davis, EdD, CCC/SLP is a speech-language pathologist in the Boston area. She holds a special interest providing services to children and adolescents with complex communication profiles, including AAC. Davis is a volunteer SLP and consultant to Step by Step Guyana, a school for children with Autism in South America.

 

“Use Your Speech Tools!” Why Your Child Who Stutters May Not Be Using His Strategies

Stuttering Tools

When a child who stutters demonstrates the ability to change his speech during a treatment session, it seems obvious that he’d want to use the same strategies to improve speech outside the session as well.  Children, especially teenagers, rarely want to stand out in a way that stigmatizes them, provokes questions or increases the chances of teasing.   So the question arises, “Why aren’t they using their tools?!”

Speech and stuttering modification techniques are often learned quickly and easily within the treatment setting.  However, SLPs and parents often feel discouraged when these tools seem to disappear as soon as the client gets to his car.  Is it laziness on the part of the child?  Is it the fault of the family for not following through with home assignments?  Is the SLP not teaching the best strategies?

Instead of placing blame, consider the following three reasons a child may have difficulty generalizing his skills:

Reason # 1: These Techniques Are Too Hard! 

Making changes to one’s speech becomes exponentially harder when you introduce factors that often are not present in the session, such as interruptions, time pressure and feelings of embarrassment or shame associated with stuttering. Learned escape/avoidance behaviors and increased language demands may make it very difficult to use these tools.  Suddenly, what felt like an easy decision to use a new technique, becomes complicated by the person’s desire to be heard in a large group of chatty peers or by the need to formulate an excuse about why he doesn’t have his homework.

How Can I Help?

Children will be more likely to use speech/stuttering strategies if they are first introduced in safe and supportive environments (i.e. home, session room).  To help with this, create a hierarchy of speaking situations and use it to guide where the client practices the strategies.  If a child who stutters is not yet using speech tools in certain situations such as the classroom, it is probably because of where that situation is on his hierarchy. Work with your clients to determine where they would like to use their strategies , while also identifying those situations where they would prefer to concentrate on things other than using their tools.

Reason #2: These Techniques Make Me Sound Weird! 

There are several techniques that may be taught to a child who stutters. Some strategies involve prolonging the initial sound to ease into or out of a word with less physical tension or struggle.  Other techniques include inserting more pauses into speech.   All speech tools require a child to alter their speech in a way that is still different from how his friends sound.  Children may report that they have similar negative thoughts and feelings about using these strategies as they do about their stuttering.  This may play a role in why they are choosing not to use speech strategies outside their sessions.

How Can I Help?

Just as you might spend time trying to help reduce negative reactions to stuttering, you might also spend time desensitizing clients to hearing themselves use strategies through voluntary stuttering assignments.  Children can also benefit from improving their ability to handle listener reactions. This can be addressed by participating in role-playing activities that help the child create “scripts” for responding to curiosity/teasing.  For example: “Why do you sound like that?” “Sometimes I stretch my sounds like that to help me get out of a stutter.”  The more comfortable the child feels with his strategies and ability to respond to questions about his speech, the more prepared he will be to use these techniques outside the session.

Reason #3: These Techniques Aren’t Worth it!  

A cost-benefit analysis can be useful when trying to understand why a child may choose not to use speech/stuttering strategies.  At the surface, it may appear that there are many benefits of using strategies which include increased fluency and improved overall communication. However, SLPs and parents must be careful to consider the costs, as well.  Costs may include increased effort, difficulty concentrating on the content of message, the risk of showing more stuttering and the potential that the strategy doesn’t work.

How Can I Help?

Have discussions with clients about what they perceive as potential costs versus benefits of using strategies in a variety of different speaking situations.  As the child becomes more accepting of stuttering and is better able to tolerate both his feelings about stuttering and listener reactions, physical tension and struggles associated with speaking will decrease.  As this happens, tools become easier to use and costs may not feel so high.

The bottom line 

There are several strategies that may help reduce stuttering frequency and severity.  However, you often can’t offer these tools without first considering and incorporating goals that target how the client thinks and feels about his speech both while stuttering and while using tools.

Brooke Leiman, MA, CCC-SLP, is the Director of the Stuttering Clinic at the National Speech/Language Therapy Center in Bethesda, Md. She is an affiliate of ASHA Special Interest Group 4, Fluency and Fluency Disorders. This blog post is adapted from a post on her blog, www.stutteringsource.com, which focuses on fluency disorders and their treatment.

 

 

Tales From Apraxia Boot Camp

bootcamp
In August of this year, I was selected to be a part of The Childhood Apraxia of Speech Association of North America’s 2014 Intensive Training Institute, otherwise known as “Apraxia Boot Camp.” Twenty-four speech-language pathologists, including myself, trained with three mentors–Ruth Stoeckel, Kathy Jakielski, and Dave Hammer–at Duquesne University over four days. In its third year, the goal of the boot camp is to spread a high level of knowledge about Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS) assessment and treatment throughout the United States and Canada. This conference accomplished that and so much more.

This experience was different than any other continuing education seminars that I have attended. We did not listen to speakers discuss CAS. Instead, Ruth, Kathy and Dave became our mentors. This was powerful. They moderated discussions on evaluation and treatment approaches. We reviewed research papers and had long debates on the principles of motor learning. We highlighted and critiqued therapy methods for those brave enough to show videos of themselves. We problem solved and brought up more questions than we knew were possible.

In smaller groups, our mentors provided insights and personal perspectives on how they work. In this intimate setting, we felt comfortable asking questions and sharing our experiences. The mentors shared constructive criticism along with thoughtful suggestions. In all, they made me think, reflect and question everything I do. Why do I give that test? Why do I treat that way? What is the research behind it? They encouraged us to become critical thinkers.

As therapists, we often get used to using the same materials and therapy techniques we learned in graduate school or during our early experiences. Those methods are not always effective with every child we treat nor are they all proven effective with evidence based-research. Specifically, children with CAS require different therapy techniques than other children with articulation or phonological delays.

Ruth, Kathy and Dave provided valuable information in a small, engaging setting. Their mentoring and passion for CAS has inspired me and I hope to pass along this valuable information to others through mentoring, improving my competency in treatment and diagnosis of CAS, and, in the end, helping children to communicate.

Based on my experience, I’d recommend asking yourself a few questions when selecting your next continuing education event:

  • What am I passionate about? Is there a child or an area of speech pathology that truly inspires me?
  • How will it improve my skill set?
  • How will it help me better serve my clients?
  • Who is doing the most current, researched-based evaluation or therapy techniques?
  • How will it further our profession?

 

Amanda Zimmerman, MA, CCC-SLP, is a pediatric speech-language pathologist in Columbus, OH. She can be reached at azimmerman@columbusspeech.org.

In Appreciation: Sylvia Onesti Richardson

Richardson SylviaSylvia Onesti Richardson, president of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association in 1973-74  and a passionate advocate for children with language and learning disorders, died in her home on Friday, October 24. A Tampa resident since 1980, she was 94 years old.

Throughout her career, Richardson strongly advocated for children with learning disabilities and speech-language disorders: In 1949 she established at Boston Children’s Medical Center the first speech-language clinic in any children’s hospital in the United States. She also created the Child Study Center and became involved in the use of Montessori educational methods for children with learning disabilities while at the University of Oklahoma. In Cincinnati, she was a founding member of the Hamilton County Diagnostic Center for Children with Learning Disabilities and the founding editor of Children’s House magazine. In 1970, she was invited to the White House Conference on Children and in 1977, was appointed to the President’s Commission on Mental Health. She was also Chair of the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities from 1997 to 1999, and a member for 30 years.

Richardson received her training in pediatrics from the Montreal Children’s Hospital and the Boston Children’s Medical Center and was also an ASHA-certified speech-language pathologist  and certified Montessori primary teacher. Richardson had numerous academic appointments, culminating in Emeritus Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the University of South Florida, where she began teaching in 1981.

Richardson has contributed much to the literature of her field with more than 100 publications including the book, “Something’s Wrong With My Child: A Parent’s Book About Children with Learning Disabilities,” 1973. She also received numerous honors, including the 1964 Oklahoma Woman of the Year.

Richardson’s professional accomplishments are only a part of her remarkable life. She was an active member of the Athena Society, and especially their Young Women of Promise Award program, which has been renamed in her honor. She was a strong supporter of the arts, especially the Straz Center for the Performing Arts, and she loved to attend performances there.

She is survived by her brother, Silvio Onesti; her sons William and Christopher; and her grandchildren: Lucas, Michael, Eva, Will, Anna and Sophia. These grandchildren were Richardson’s pride and joy. She attended many graduations from high schools and colleges, and this past June saw Lucas get married.

A memorial service was held Saturday, November 8, in Tampa.

In lieu of flowers, memorial contributions may be made to the International Dyslexia Association, 40 York Road, 4th Floor, Baltimore, MD 21204.

Teens and Feeding Therapy:  An SLP’s Top Five Tips!

Making trying new foods fun for teens.

Making trying new foods fun for teens.

As a pediatric feeding therapist, it’s not unusual for me to get a call from a mother who says “My kid’s 14 years old and still eats only six foods. He’s so picky!  I thought he would grow out of it.”  True, with patience and consistent strategies, some kids do indeed grow out of the picky-eater stage, typically at its peak aro

und age three. But if the child had underlying motor, physiological or sensory challenges that stalled the developmental process of learning to eat a variety of foods, it’s not unusual that selective eating behaviors will prevail into the teenage years.  I approach treatment with teens in a similar manner as my younger clients while respecting one important fact: They are teenagers!

Here are my top five tips for interacting with teens while building trust and confidence, plus making feeding therapy successful (and fun!) for both of you:

#5  Use Cool Games:  I always incorporate games into feeding practice.  Learning to try new foods is HARD, at any age.  Including games in the process of biting, chewing and tasting keeps anxiety levels low and still allows learning to take place.  Using games as a means of distraction, such as eating while playing independently on an iPad, does not allow for conscious learning.  Instead, try using games that are reciprocal in nature and where each player’s turn lasts no more than ten seconds.  If your client is working on learning to drink a smoothie, perhaps he might take a drink, get a turn, etc.  Try Blockus, UNO Blast or  Connect-4 Launchers, all interactive and exciting games. Plus, they are easy to clean, which is important in feeding treatment.

#4 Create Your Own Games: To quote a bit of teenage lingo, find out what the teenager “is obsessed with” and create games around that obsession. Does she love three-toed sloths?  Pull up the best sloth videos on YouTube and create a Jeopardy game around them, hiding each video under categories like  “Kristen Bell for One Hundred Please.”   I once had a client who knew every Movie Production Logo in Hollywood.  His mother sent me pictures of ten favorite logos and I laminated two copies of each.  During feeding therapy in his home, we would spread out the laminated pictures all over the kitchen floor and after each bite, try to toss a penny onto a picture.  Get a match, and you get a point.  Another client of mine was obsessed with paintball, but I wasn’t about to do feeding therapy in a paintball bunker.  Instead, I brought my Discovery Toys Marbleworks® and with each bite we added one piece, eventually building intricate contraptions and using the paintballs as marbles.

#3 Ask WHY: Once I get to know a teen, I always ask this question: “Is there a special reason you want to learn to try new foods?” One teen told me that he wanted to ask his girlfriend to Prom, but was afraid that he couldn’t take her to a fancy restaurant for dinner.  “I don’t think they serve pizza there, and that’s all I know how to eat.” That was eye-opening for me!  Now I know his motivation and we have a timeline for success. When there is no motivation, that’s a problem.   It’s common for a teen to reply: “I don’t want to learn to eat anything new – my Mom is making me.”  This is the time to help a teen FIND motivation.  “How’s wrestling going?  Did you know you need protein to build more lean muscle? What types of protein would you like to learn to eat: nuts, hamburger or vegetable protein?”  One of my clients had been consisting on  four strawberry Pediasures mixed with whole milk every day for over three years before starting therapy. He used to eat some solid foods, but over time began to limit his intake until he was food jagging on Pediasure.  He didn’t see a problem, because he liked the way he could gulp down a Pediasure and rush outside during break time to play basketball with his friends. That worked for him because it enabled him to avoid social eating in the cafeteria, which made him very anxious.  I suspected that the high dairy content was making him constipated, thus decreasing appetite.  Let’s face it: A teen is not likely to tell ME about his constipation.  But, I called his pediatrician and requested that they have the constipation talk during the upcoming sports physical.  Once his doctor explained that he would no longer have to struggle with bathroom issues, which was a huge source of embarrassment for him, the teen was open to tasting some new foods.  Feeding therapy, especially with teens, goes best when we focus on the whole child and learning what’s important in his unique world.

#2  Teach positive self-talk: So many older kids engage in negative talk about food because it stops parents from serving it.  Over time, those negative comments become a habit that for lack of better term, is a form of self-brainwashing.  While it’s important to acknowledge a teen’s feelings if he says “I can’t – I’m scared I’ll gag,”  it’s just as important to help him talk positively about eating.  I explain it this way:

I want you to talk to your own brain the way you would talk to your best friend.  If your best friend had practiced with his soccer coach to take a goal kick in soccer but was feeling anxious when it came time to attempt it, he might turn and whisper to you, “I can’t – I’m scared that I’ll miss.” You’d probably tell  him “You’ve practiced with coach and you have the skills to do it!  It’s OK to be nervous – you can still make that goal!”  He needs to hear that from you.  Well, your brain needs to hear the same positive talk from you when you talk about food.  It’s OK to be nervous and it’s OK not to like the taste of it.  We’re just beginning to learn how to how to eat this new food and we are practicing it.”

And this SLP’s #1 Tip? Give Them the Script: Teens may not always have the most descriptive vocabulary, except to narrow taste and texture down to “gross.”   Give them the language and discuss what terms like savory, buttery, creamy truly mean.  A reference list of 345 terms to describe food can be found here.  Plus, it helpful to use comparison phrases such as “It’s similar to tiny dots of corn, but it’s called polenta” in order to build familiarity with a food they’ve experienced in some manner, such as corn.  If the most interaction they’ve had with corn is just staring at it, that’s OK!  Stare at the polenta.  Make it a kitchen science experiment and discuss all the properties of polenta if you need to.  Give them the words that build visual familiarity with polenta: “yellow cornmeal”, “hulled”, etc.  Talk about how it can be baked, fried, grilled or stirred into a porridge.  Interact with it – get to know it.  Now you’ve got a teen whose introducing his brain to polenta by saying: “Polenta is cornmeal, which is made from something I’m familiar with: corn.  I think it looks best when it’s fried, because I like fried foods.” He’s OPEN to the concept of Polenta because he has the terminology to describe it and understand the properties. As you progress from visual interaction to tactile exploration, provide terms that describe the feel of polenta such as “gritty” and “course.” Eventually, you’ll be discussing the same feel in the mouth.  As all SLPs know, language is empowering.

What other strategies do you have when helping teens interact with new foods?  Please list them in the comments section, thank you!

Melanie Potock, MA, CCC-SLP, treats children birth to teens who have difficulty eating.  She is the author of Happy Mealtimes with Happy Kids and the producer of the award-winning kids’ CD Dancing in the Kitchen: Songs that Celebrate the Joy of Food!  Melanie’s two-day course on pediatric feeding is  offered for ASHA CEUs and includes both her book and CD for each attendee.  She can be reached at Melanie@mymunchbug.com.

Trick or Treating Voice Disorders: 3 Reasons Why It’s Not So Scary

singingcloseup

Hopefully the least scary thing to happen to you this Halloween season is getting a voice client on your caseload. (You think, I had a class on voice disorders once…maybe? You pull out your voice resources. Ew–that’s what the vocal folds look like? Ew–that’s what a vocal fold lesion looks like? Those are TEP’s? Yikes. I’ll stick with my articulation and language clients thank you very much.)

I hear from clinicians all the time, in person and on the web, that they are frightened to even attempt providing therapy to a voice client. Even with all the wonderful new technology and apps available, is it really as bad as walking through a haunted house while clowns lunge towards you?

Taking a step back, I remember that every person with a CCC-SLP trailing his or her signature was not thrust into this profession in the same way I was. I already knew a thing or two (or so I thought) about the voice and was ready to begin my college career as a singer. Alas, this was not in the stars for me as I had a vocal cyst requiring voice therapy and surgical removal. There was no way I was catching up to my same-aged peers with vocal performance degree aspirations to graduate on time. My voice teacher sat me down (I think I may have actually been standing in a voice lesson) and told me the words that would (for the next few years at least) be as frightening as that haunted house clown…”You have to find a new career path.” I was shocked, hurt and lost.

After lifting my chin and changing majors, I decided I wanted to help others in the same situation as me. I would use my vocal upbringing, my musical skills and my unique perspective to become a go-to voice clinician. It wasn’t until graduate school that I actually began to understand how my vocal mechanism worked. I studied video after picture after diagram of the larynx, its muscles, and the vocal folds. Slowly, and after 2 years of singing rehabilitation, I began to learn to love singing again and I now am thankful for that seemingly harsh (but necessary) redirection. My dream had changed,  but I became a better performer because of it.

Treating clients suffering from voice disorders requires just as much creativity as treating any language or articulation disorder. It requires out-of-the-box thinking when a particular technique doesn’t work. Which brings me to my first reason voice therapy is not so scary.

REASON NUMBER 1: You are allowed to change your strategy mid-session. I change techniques all the time when I sense the client is frustrated or if the client is unable to achieve a target sound production after a good amount of trying. This is a learned skill and requires humility. I learned this lesson the hard way back in school as I prepared a therapy lesson for one of my first few child clients. I spent hours preparing the “perfect” board game on the computer only to get to therapy the next day and the child was bored to tears playing it. Ego-0, Kid-1. But really, if coordinating respiration, phonation and resonance with Stone & Casteel’s Stretch and Flow or Confidential Voice Therapy (techniques that require increased airflow as the main component in unloading the vocal mechanism) is too difficult for the patient, switch to Resonant Voice Therapy (a technique that uses forward-focused feeling and sound to improve subsystem coordination). If it is not working with the patient seated, have the patient stand and bend over into rag-doll. Use a mirror. Use a tissue. Use a hand. Use your IPHONE to record. Any of this feedback could be the ticket to a successful intervention, so here is the second gem.

REASON NUMBER 2: Odd and strange techniques are encouraged. Sometimes, the weirdest one results in a break-through. If you are confident in your techniques, the patient will be too. As I continue to provide voice therapy to patients, they look at me less and less as though I have 3 heads when I ask them to put a straw in their mouths, bend over and hum Yankee-Doodle. This is because I have seen the outcomes and know that the seemingly silly activities I have patients do in session really provide tangible improvement. This confidence is translated in how I present a task. Some say, “Fake it till you make it.” I say fake it, but make sure you know what you’re faking. You are going to have to feel uncomfortable to make yourself great. Just remember to include the 3 main components of voice therapy in your treatment planning: “Improving Vocal Hygiene, Decreasing Phonotrauma, Coordinating Subsystems.” That’s it. Voice disorders seemed so much more complicated at one time, didn’t it? As a community of SLP’s and AuD’s, we support each other with therapy ideas. I witness daily on my social media perusals where a weary SLP is calling an SOS for a difficult case. We help each other out, so here is the final tidbit.

REASON NUMBER 3: Community means community resources. There is never a dumb question on any list-serv or forum I have ever been a part of. I witness graduate students getting answers from seasoned professionals. I once was scared of the “greats,” but they are people just like me and just like you who just want patients and clients to improve. It is humbling to step back and admit you need to “use a lifeline.” I think this is not a sign of weakness, but of strength as a resourceful clinician. If we can expect honest feedback, we can provide the best care, and isn’t that what it’s all about? See, not so scary!

And in lieu of trick-or-treat candy, here are a few resources that are just as yummy:

Improving Vocal Hygiene

Eliminating Vocal Abuse/Misuse

Coordinating Vocal Subsystems

Hopefully now you are armed with some new information on the voice. Don’t be afraid to make mistakes and get messy. (Magic School Bus anyone?) Voice therapy is not nearly as scary as that large pile of paperwork on your desk…(That deserves a Halloween costume…)

Kristie Knickerbocker, MS, CCC-SLP, is a speech-language pathologist and singing voice specialist in Fort Worth, Texas. She provides voice, swallowing and speech therapy in her own private practice, a tempo Voice Center, LLC. She also lectures on the singing voice to area choirs and students. She belongs to ASHA’s Special Interest Group 3-Voice and Voice Disorders. She keeps a blog on her website at www.atempovoicecenter.com. Follow her on Twitter @atempovoice or like her on Facebook at www.facebook.com/atempovoicecenter.

 

A Misleading Account of Research on Stuttering Treatment for Young Children

stutter

A recent ASHA Leader article by Peter Reitzes on treatment for preschoolers who stutter makes claims to the efficacy of some treatments that are both misleading and not evidence based – at least as far as published research is concerned.  Reitzes refers readers to a study by Franken, Kielstra-Van der Schalk and Boelens (2005) that claims to have shown no difference between the results or outcome of the Lidcombe Program and a Demands and Capacities treatment approach.  That study, as Bothe, Davidow, Bramlett and Ingham (2006) reported in their systematic review of research on the treatment of stuttering, is fundamentally flawed, making the results uninterpretable.

A study by Jones et al. (2005) evaluating the Lidcombe Program, did so by comparing children who stutter that were treated by Lidcombe with a control group that did not receive treatment. Another study by Yairi, Ambrose, Paden and Throneburg (1996) made it clear that preschool children (especially those who have been stuttering for less than 15 months) have a very high rate of untreated recovery. Consequently, any treatment evaluation using that age group needs to be compared with an untreated control group so as to show that its beneficial effects exceed those that would occur without treatment.  In the case of the Franken et al. (2005) study there was no untreated control group.  Hence, Bothe, et al. (2006) concluded that “Franken et al.’s data are difficult to interpret without a no-treatment control group to confirm that their application of either treatment was actually effective” (2005, p. 331).  In fact, that is a very charitable comment because the data are not just “difficult to interpret” – they are impossible to interpret! There is nothing in this study that would show that any speech performance improvements (from Lidcombe or Demands and Capacities) exceeded those that might have occurred without treatment.

There is even more to be concerned about in the Reitzes article.  He describes a presentation by Franken at the 2013 NSA conference of another study that also compared Lidcombe Program with a Demands and Capacities treatments. This study (Franken, 2013) used a larger cohort (n =199; 3-6 years) and reported findings similar to those reported by Franken et al. (2005).  It was claimed that after 18 months there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of stuttering frequency and percentage of children recovered.  But this study simply repeats the design error identified by Bothe et al. (2006): yet again there was no untreated control group.  The importance of controlling for a natural rate of recovery is also underscored by the report that many of the study’s children may have been stuttering for between 6 and 15 months when they entered the study. It is now almost indisputable that a high rate of untreated recovery characterizes children in this bracket (Ingham & Cordes, 1999). The argument that some might raise that running an untreated control group would amount to unethically withholding treatment is not an excuse or defense. There are many alternative research designs that can offset this problem (see Kazdin, 1998). And if one is concerned about ethics in research, how can it be argued that it’s ethical to draw unwarranted conclusions about the effects of treatments for preschool children who stutter that are based on research designs that cannot support those conclusions?

The fact that the Bothe et al. (2006) review was not mentioned among the sources or references for this article is puzzling.  Either Reitzes was unaware of this critique of the Franken et al. (2005) study, or for some reason chose to ignore it. Or perhaps he is unaware of the high rate of natural recovery in this population and thus did not understand the threat that that fact posed to the usefulness of the Franken and colleagues’ findings. Nonetheless, readers should not be ignorant of the deceptive message conveyed within his article.

Roger J. Ingham and Janis Costello Ingham are professors in the Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Roger Ingham is an affiliate of ASHA Special Interest Group 4, Fluency and Fluency Disorders.

 

References

Bothe, A.K., Davidow, J.H., Bramlett, R.E., & Ingham, R.J. (2006).  Stuttering treatment research, 1970 – 2005: I. Systematic review incorporating trial quality assessment of behavioral, cognitive, and related approaches.  American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 321-341.

Franken, M-C. (2013). Comparing a Demands and Capacities Model approach and the Lidcombe Program for preschool stuttering children: The RESTART randomized trial (Abstract). NSA Conference Presentation, Scottsdale, AZ.

Franken, M-C., Kielstra-Van der Schalk, C. J., & Boelens, H. (2005). Experimental treatment of early stuttering: A preliminary study. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 30, 189-199.

Ingham, R.J., & Cordes, A.K. (1999). On watching a discipline shoot itself in the foot: Some observations on current trends in stuttering treatment research. In N. Bernstein Ratner and E.C. Healey (Eds.), Stuttering Research and Practice: Bridging the Gap (pp. 211-230). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Jones, M., Onslow, M., Packman, A.,Williams, S., Ormond, T., Schwartz, I., et al. (2005). Randomized controlled trial of the Lidcombe Programme of early stuttering intervention [Electronic version]. British Medical Journal, 331(7518), 659.

Kazdin, A.E.  (1998). Research design in clinical psychology (3rd ed).  Boston MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Reitzes, P. (2014). The powered-up parent. The ASHA Leader, 19, 50-56.

Yairi, E., Ambrose, N.G., Paden, E.P., & Throneburg, R.N.  (1996). Predictive factors persistence and recovery: Pathways of childhood stuttering.  Journal of Communication Disorders, 29, 51-77.