The Levels of Speech Usage rating scale: comparison of client self-ratings with speech pathologist ratings.

作者: Christina Gray , Carolyn Baylor , Tanya Eadie , Diane Kendall , Kathryn Yorkston

DOI: 10.1111/J.1460-6984.2011.00112.X

关键词:

摘要: Abstract Background: The term ‘speech usage’ refers to what people want or need do with their speech fulfil the communication demands in life roles. Speech–language pathologists (SLPs) know about clients’ usage plan appropriate interventions meet participation goals. Levels of Speech Usage is a categorical scale intended for client self-report usage, but SLPs may option use it as proxy-report tool. relationship between and clinician ratings should be examined before instrument used proxy format. Aims: primary purpose this study was compare self-ratings SLP on scale. secondary determine if differed depending whether not knew medical condition. Methods & Procedures: Self-ratings adults disorders were available from prior research. Vignettes these individuals created existing data. Two sets vignettes created. One set contained information demographic information, living situation, occupational status hobbies social activities. second identical first addition conditions disorders. Various represented including dysarthria, voice disorders, laryngectomy, mild cognitive language Sixty randomly divided into two groups each group rating one vignettes. task completed online. While does replicate typical in-person clinical interactions, feasible method study. For data analysis, considered fixed points percentage agreement calculated. Outcomes Results: exact 44.9%. Agreement lowest less-demanding categories highest most demanding category. There no significant difference based knowledge condition. Conclusions Implications: often document levels clients. This suggests potential misjudge how clients see own demands. Further research needed similar results would found actual interactions. Until then, seek input when using instrument.

参考文章(33)
Thompson Cm, Ferketic Mm, Frattali Cm, Wohl Cb, Holland Al, The FACS of life ASHA facs--a functional outcome measure for adults. ASHA. ,vol. 37, pp. 40- ,(1995)
Elena M. Andresen, Victoria J. Vahle, Donald Lollar, Proxy reliability: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures for people with disability Quality of Life Research. ,vol. 10, pp. 609- 619 ,(2001) , 10.1023/A:1013187903591
Alison Behrman, Lucian Sulica, Tina He, Factors predicting patient perception of dysphonia caused by benign vocal fold lesions. Laryngoscope. ,vol. 114, pp. 1693- 1700 ,(2004) , 10.1097/00005537-200410000-00004
Madeline Cruice, Linda Worrall, Louise Hickson, Personal factors, communication and vision predict social participation in older adults Advances in Speech-Language Pathology. ,vol. 7, pp. 220- 232 ,(2005) , 10.1080/14417040500337088
Uriel Pierre, Sharon Wood-Dauphinee, Nicol Korner-Bitensky, David Gayton, Jim Hanley, Proxy Use of the Canadian SF-36 in Rating Health Status of the Disabled Elderly Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. ,vol. 51, pp. 983- 990 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00090-0
Kathryn M. Yorkston, Carolyn R. Baylor, Jean Dietz, Brian J. Dudgeon, Tanya Eadie, Robert M. Miller, Dagmar Amtmann, Developing a scale of communicative participation: a cognitive interviewing study. Disability and Rehabilitation. ,vol. 30, pp. 425- 433 ,(2008) , 10.1080/09638280701625328
A. Van Nunen, C. H. Polman, B. M. J. Uitdehaag, F. A. H. van der Linden, M. B. D’hooghe, G. Nagels, Proxy ratings from multiple sources: disagreement on the impact of multiple sclerosis on daily life. European Journal of Neurology. ,vol. 15, pp. 933- 939 ,(2008) , 10.1111/J.1468-1331.2008.02224.X
Erkki Vilkman, Voice problems at work: A challenge for occupational safety and health arrangement. Folia Phoniatrica Et Logopaedica. ,vol. 52, pp. 120- 125 ,(2000) , 10.1159/000021519
Jody Kreiman, Bruce R. Gerratt, Gail B. Kempster, Andrew Erman, Gerald S. Berke, Perceptual Evaluation of Voice Quality Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research. ,vol. 36, pp. 21- 40 ,(1993) , 10.1044/JSHR.3601.21