PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To identify and agree on what outcome domains should be measured in research and clinical practice when working with stroke survivors who have dysarthria.
METHODS: Delphi process, two rounds of an online survey followed by two online consensus meetings.
METHODS: UK and Australia.
METHODS: Stroke survivors with experience of dysarthria, speech and language therapists/pathologists working in stroke and communication researchers.
METHODS: Initial list of outcome domains generated from existing literature and with our patient and public involvement group to develop the survey. Participants completed two rounds of this survey to rate importance. Outcomes were identified as \'in\', \'unclear\' or \'out\' from the second survey. All participants were invited to two consensus meetings to discuss these results followed by voting to identify critically important outcome domains for a future Core Outcome Set. All outcomes were voted on in the consensus meetings and included if 70% of meeting participants voted \'yes\' for critically important.
RESULTS: In total, 148 surveys were fully completed, and 28 participants attended the consensus meetings. A core outcome set for dysarthria after stroke should include four outcome domains: (a) intelligibility of speech, (b) ability to participate in conversations, (c) living well with dysarthria, (d) skills and knowledge of communication partners (where relevant).
CONCLUSIONS: We describe the consensus of \'what\' speech outcomes after stroke are valued by all stakeholders including those with lived experience. We share these findings to encourage the measurement of these domains in clinical practice and research and for future research to identify \'how\' best to measure these outcomes.
METHODS: Delphi process, two rounds of an online survey followed by two online consensus meetings.
METHODS: UK and Australia.
METHODS: Stroke survivors with experience of dysarthria, speech and language therapists/pathologists working in stroke and communication researchers.
METHODS: Initial list of outcome domains generated from existing literature and with our patient and public involvement group to develop the survey. Participants completed two rounds of this survey to rate importance. Outcomes were identified as \'in\', \'unclear\' or \'out\' from the second survey. All participants were invited to two consensus meetings to discuss these results followed by voting to identify critically important outcome domains for a future Core Outcome Set. All outcomes were voted on in the consensus meetings and included if 70% of meeting participants voted \'yes\' for critically important.
RESULTS: In total, 148 surveys were fully completed, and 28 participants attended the consensus meetings. A core outcome set for dysarthria after stroke should include four outcome domains: (a) intelligibility of speech, (b) ability to participate in conversations, (c) living well with dysarthria, (d) skills and knowledge of communication partners (where relevant).
CONCLUSIONS: We describe the consensus of \'what\' speech outcomes after stroke are valued by all stakeholders including those with lived experience. We share these findings to encourage the measurement of these domains in clinical practice and research and for future research to identify \'how\' best to measure these outcomes.
摘要：
目的：确定并同意在研究和临床实践中与患有构音障碍的卒中幸存者一起工作时应该测量哪些结果领域。
方法：Delphi过程，进行了两轮在线调查，随后举行了两次在线共识会议。
方法：英国和澳大利亚。
方法：有构音障碍经验的卒中幸存者，在中风和交流研究人员中工作的言语和语言治疗师/病理学家。
方法：从现有文献中生成的初始结果域列表，并与我们的患者和公众参与小组进行调查。参与者完成了两轮调查以评估重要性。结果被标识为\'在\'中，第二次调查中的\'不清楚\'或\'出\'。所有与会者都被邀请参加两次共识会议，讨论这些结果，然后投票确定未来核心成果集至关重要的成果领域。所有结果都在共识会议上进行了投票，其中包括70％的会议参与者投票赞成至关重要。
结果：总计，148项调查全部完成,28名与会者出席了协商一致会议。中风后构音障碍的核心结果集应包括四个结果域：（a）语音的清晰度，(b)参与对话的能力，(c)构音障碍患者生活良好，(d)通信伙伴的技能和知识(在相关情况下)。
结论：我们描述了所有利益相关方（包括有生活经验的利益相关方）对中风后言语结局的共识。我们分享这些发现，以鼓励在临床实践和研究中对这些领域进行测量，并为未来的研究确定如何最好地测量这些结果。
方法：Delphi过程，进行了两轮在线调查，随后举行了两次在线共识会议。
方法：英国和澳大利亚。
方法：有构音障碍经验的卒中幸存者，在中风和交流研究人员中工作的言语和语言治疗师/病理学家。
方法：从现有文献中生成的初始结果域列表，并与我们的患者和公众参与小组进行调查。参与者完成了两轮调查以评估重要性。结果被标识为\'在\'中，第二次调查中的\'不清楚\'或\'出\'。所有与会者都被邀请参加两次共识会议，讨论这些结果，然后投票确定未来核心成果集至关重要的成果领域。所有结果都在共识会议上进行了投票，其中包括70％的会议参与者投票赞成至关重要。
结果：总计，148项调查全部完成,28名与会者出席了协商一致会议。中风后构音障碍的核心结果集应包括四个结果域：（a）语音的清晰度，(b)参与对话的能力，(c)构音障碍患者生活良好，(d)通信伙伴的技能和知识(在相关情况下)。
结论：我们描述了所有利益相关方（包括有生活经验的利益相关方）对中风后言语结局的共识。我们分享这些发现，以鼓励在临床实践和研究中对这些领域进行测量，并为未来的研究确定如何最好地测量这些结果。
