Article  |   October 2010
A Treatment for Dysprosody in Childhood Apraxia of Speech
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Kirrie J. Ballard
    University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Donald A. Robin
    The University of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio and The University of Texas at San Antonio
  • Patricia McCabe
    University of Sydney
  • Jeannie McDonald
    University of Sydney
  • Contact author: Kirrie J. Ballard, Speech Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, P.O. Box 170, Lidcombe, New South Wales 1825, Australia. E-mail: kirrie.ballard@sydney.edu.au.
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Apraxia of Speech & Childhood Apraxia of Speech / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Speech
Article   |   October 2010
A Treatment for Dysprosody in Childhood Apraxia of Speech
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, October 2010, Vol. 53, 1227-1245. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0130)
History: Received July 1, 2009 , Accepted February 18, 2010
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, October 2010, Vol. 53, 1227-1245. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0130)
History: Received July 1, 2009; Accepted February 18, 2010
Web of Science® Times Cited: 18

Purpose: Dysprosody is considered a core feature of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS), especially impaired production of lexical stress. Few studies have tested the effects of intervention for dysprosody. This Phase II study with 3 children investigated the efficacy of a treatment targeting improved control of relative syllable durations in 3-syllable nonwords representing strong-weak (SW) and weak-strong (WS) stress patterns (e.g., BAtigu or baTIgu). Treatment sessions were structured along the principles of motor learning (PML) approach.

Method: Three children, age 7 to 10 years, with mild to moderate CAS and normal language development participated in an intensive 3-week treatment. Within-participant designs with multiple baselines across participants and behaviors were used to examine acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of skill.

Results: All children improved in their ability to control relative duration of syllables in SW and WS nonwords. Improvement was also noted in control of loudness and pitch contrasts. Treatment effects generalized to untreated nonword stimuli, but minimal change was seen in production of real words.

Conclusion: Findings support the efficacy of this approach for improving production of lexical stress contrasts. Structuring the intervention according to the PML approach likely stimulated strong maintenance and generalization effects.

Acknowledgments
The study was supported by University of Sydney grants to Kirrie J. Ballard and Patricia McCabe. We wish to thank Samantha Warhurst, Lauren van Rees, and Monique Signorelli for assistance with treatment delivery and data analysis. We are indebted to the family for their support and willingness to be involved in the project.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access