Open AccessLanguage Sample Analysis in Clinical Practice: Speech-Language Pathologists' Barriers, Facilitators, and Needs
Author(s) -
Inge S. Klatte,
Vera van Heugten,
Rob Zwitserlood,
Ellen Gerrits
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
language, speech and hearing services in schools
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.097
H-Index - 69
eISSN - 1558-9129
pISSN - 0161-1461
DOI - 10.1044/2021_lshss-21-00026
Subject(s) - thematic analysis , psychology , sample (material) , clan , reimbursement , medical education , focus group , investment (military) , medicine , qualitative research , health care , business , anthropology , political science , law , economics , economic growth , social science , chemistry , chromatography , marketing , sociology , politics
Purpose: Most speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with children with developmental language disorder (DLD) do not perform language sample analysis (LSA) on a regular basis, although they do regard LSA as highly informative for goal setting and evaluating grammatical therapy. The primary aim of this study was to identify facilitators, barriers, and needs related to performing LSA by Dutch SLPs working with children with DLD. The secondary aim was to investigate whether a training would change the actual performance of LSA. Method: A focus group with 11 SLPs working in Dutch speech-language pathology practices was conducted. Barriers, facilitators, and needs were identified using thematic analysis and categorized using the theoretical domain framework. To address the barriers, a training was developed using software program CLAN. Changes in barriers and use of LSA were evaluated with a survey sent to participants before, directly after, and 3 months posttraining. Results: The barriers reported in the focus group were SLPs' lack of knowledge and skills, time investment, negative beliefs about their capabilities, differences in beliefs about their professional role, and no reimbursement from health insurance companies. Posttraining survey results revealed that LSA was not performed more often in daily practice. Using CLAN was not the solution according to participating SLPs. Time investment remained a huge barrier. Conclusions: A training in performing LSA did not resolve the time investment barrier experienced by SLPs. User-friendly software, developed in codesign with SLPs might provide a solution. For the short-term, shorter samples, preferably from narrative tasks, should be considered.