■口腔癌的治疗对言语和吞咽有衰弱的影响,然而,对目前的语言病理学实践知之甚少。
■语音病理学家(SLP)的在线调查通过电子邮件传播到语音病理学部门,社交媒体平台,和专业的在线论坛。调查问题捕捉到了人口统计,服务交付,言语和吞咽干预的类型和时机,以及实践的影响和障碍。
■在澳大利亚(n=41)和新西兰(n=2)工作的43个SLP完成了调查。SLP建议的言语和吞咽补偿策略的频率明显高于主动干预。吞咽结果测量要么是工具性的(n=31,94%),要么是表现等级的(n=25,76%),而语音是通过对清晰度的判断进行非正式测量的(n=30,91%)。SLP为他们的决策提供了一系列支持,特别是专家意见(n=81,38.2%)。他们报告说,时间和人员配备有限(n=55,55%)和缺乏相关证据(n=35,35%)是基于证据的服务提供的最大障碍。
澳大利亚和新西兰的SLP在口腔癌患者的言语和吞咽康复方面存在差异。这项研究强调了循证指南的必要性,概述了筛查过程的最佳实践。积极的康复方案,以及该人群的有效结果衡量标准。
UNASSIGNED: Treatment for oral cancer has debilitating effects on speech and swallowing, however, little is known about current speech-language pathology practice.
UNASSIGNED: An online survey of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) was disseminated via emails to speech pathology departments, social media platforms, and professional online forums. Survey questions captured demographics, service delivery, type and timing of speech and swallowing interventions, and influences and barriers to practice.
UNASSIGNED: Forty-three SLPs working in Australia (n = 41) and New Zealand (n = 2) completed the survey. SLPs recommended speech and swallowing compensatory strategies significantly more frequently than active intervention. Swallowing outcomes measures were either instrumental (n = 31, 94%) or performance ratings (n = 25, 76%), whereas speech was measured informally with judgements of intelligibility (n = 30, 91%). SLPs used a range of supports for their decision making, particularly expert opinion (n = 81, 38.2%). They reported time and staffing limitations (n = 55, 55%) and a lack of relevant evidence (n = 35, 35%) as the largest barriers to evidence-based service delivery.
UNASSIGNED: There is variability amongst SLPs in Australia and New Zealand regarding rehabilitation of speech and swallowing for people with oral cancer. This study highlights the need for evidence-based guidelines outlining best practice for screening processes, active rehabilitation protocols, and valid outcome measures with this population.