Main Study Findings and Author’s Conclusions

Main Study Findings

Author’s Conclusions

Grogan-Johnson, 2013¹¹

Student progress:

Individual descriptive data showed that levels of speech sound impairments varied at baseline, but all students advanced to higher levels of speech sound production after the treatment.
GFTA-2 scores:
- No significant differences between groups, p=0.44 for raw scores, p=0.644 for standard scores;
- There was statistically significant difference in scores between pre- and post-intervention in both groups, p=0.020.
Listener judgments
- Statistically significant difference was observed between baseline and end of treatment in both groups, p=0.007;
- No significant difference was observed between mean listener judgments in the amount of xchange across time in either group.

School-age children improved their speech sound production whether traditional intervention services were provided via telepractice or side-by-side delivery models. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the performance of the children who received services in the telepractice condition compared with the side-by-side condition according to independent judges. (pg.218)
Both groups benefited from intervention and that benefit was the same regardless of type of intervention. (pg.215)

Grogan-Johnson, 2013¹¹

Student progress:

Performance of the students rated as Mastered or Making Adequate Progress at end of 1^st treatment period:
Telehealth: 75.3%
On-site therapy: 75.6%, p value NR.

GFTA-2 scores at end of 1^st treatment period:
There was no statistically significant difference in between telehealth and on-site service, p=0.06.

Participant satisfaction:
Students, parents and staff expressed satisfaction with telehealth delivery model. Response rate to the survey was 76.3%, 66.7% and 55.6%, respectively.

Videoconferencing appears to be an effective and reliable service delivery method for school age children who receive speech language therapy services in public schools. (pg.139)

Copyright: This report contains CADTH copyright material and may contain material in which a third party owns copyright. This report may be used for the purposes of research or private study only. It may not be copied, posted on a web site, redistributed by email or stored on an electronic system without the prior written permission of CADTH or applicable copyright owner.

Links: This report may contain links to other information available on the websites of third parties on the Internet. CADTH does not have control over the content of such sites. Use of third party sites is governed by the owners’ own terms and conditions.

Except where otherwise noted, this work is distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-ND), a copy of which is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Bookshelf ID: NBK304800

Contents

< PrevNext >

Bookshelf

Telehealth for Speech and Language Pathology: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness, and Guidelines [Internet].

APPENDIX 4Main Study Findings and Author’s Conclusions

Table A3Summary of Findings of Included Studies

Views

Other titles in this collection

Recent Activity

Main Study Findings	Author’s Conclusions
Grogan-Johnson, 2013¹¹
Student progress: Individual descriptive data showed that levels of speech sound impairments varied at baseline, but all students advanced to higher levels of speech sound production after the treatment. GFTA-2 scores: No significant differences between groups, p=0.44 for raw scores, p=0.644 for standard scores; There was statistically significant difference in scores between pre- and post-intervention in both groups, p=0.020. Listener judgments Statistically significant difference was observed between baseline and end of treatment in both groups, p=0.007; No significant difference was observed between mean listener judgments in the amount of xchange across time in either group.	School-age children improved their speech sound production whether traditional intervention services were provided via telepractice or side-by-side delivery models. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the performance of the children who received services in the telepractice condition compared with the side-by-side condition according to independent judges. (pg.218) Both groups benefited from intervention and that benefit was the same regardless of type of intervention. (pg.215)
Grogan-Johnson, 2013¹¹
Student progress: Performance of the students rated as Mastered or Making Adequate Progress at end of 1^st treatment period: Telehealth: 75.3% On-site therapy: 75.6%, p value NR. GFTA-2 scores at end of 1^st treatment period: There was no statistically significant difference in between telehealth and on-site service, p=0.06. Participant satisfaction: Students, parents and staff expressed satisfaction with telehealth delivery model. Response rate to the survey was 76.3%, 66.7% and 55.6%, respectively.	Videoconferencing appears to be an effective and reliable service delivery method for school age children who receive speech language therapy services in public schools. (pg.139)