Motor Learning Theory Based Treatment for an Adolescent with CAS: A Single Subject Design
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12970/2311-1917.2015.03.02.3Keywords:
Childhood apraxia of speech, feedback, motor learning theory, speech intelligibility, condition of practice.Abstract
Despite a considerable amount of research on intervention approaches for CAS (childhood apraxia of speech), little work has been done on the effectiveness of motor learning theory based treatment for adolescents with CAS. This study investigates the effect of a motor learning theory based treatment approach on an adolescent with CAS whose severity ranged from mild to moderate. A multiple baseline design across behaviors (target words and sentences) was used in this study. Three sets (20 words for Group 1 and 10 sentences each for Groups 2 and 3) of target stimuli were created (based on high functionality) by the participant and his primary caregiver. The subject was instructed to produce the target word or sentences five times with a 4-second pause between each attempt. Knowledge of results (KR) feedback was given after 5 attempts regarding his performance. The subject repeated each target stimulus 25 times and received 20 % feedback between each trial 5 times. The results showed that the mean scores of speech intelligibility increased during the sessions for target words and sentences and this effect was substantially transferred to untrained target words and sentences.
References
Caruso AJ, Strand EA. Clinical management of motor speech disorders in children. New York: Thieme medical publisher 1999.
Davis BL, Jakielski KJ, Marquardt TP. Developmental apraxia of speech: determiners of differential diagnosis. Clin Linguist Phonet 1998; 12: 25-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/02699209808985211
American Speech-Language and Hearing Association Web Site. [Online]; 2007 [cited 2014 November 12. Available from: http:/www.asha.org/Practice-Portal/Clinical-Topics/Childhood-Apraxia-of-Speech/.
Marquart T, Sussman H, Davis B. Developmental apraxia of speech: advances in theory and practice. In: vogel M, Cannito MP. Treating disordered speech motor control. 2nd ed. Austin: Pro-Ed 2001; pp. 413-73.
Shriberg LD, Campbell TF, Karlsson HB, Brown RL, McSweeny JL, Nadler CJ. A diagnostic marker for childhood apraxia of speech: the lexical stress ratio. Clin Linguist Phonet 2003; 17: 549-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0269920031000138123
Crary MA. Developmental motor speech disorders. NY: Delmar Cengage learning 1993.
Yorkston KM, Beukelman DR, Strand EA, Bell KR. Management of Motor Speech Disorders in Children and Adults. 3rd ed. Austin: Pro-Ed 2010.
Maassen B. Issues contrasting adult acquired versus developmental apraxia of speech. Semin Speech Lang 2002; 23: 257-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2002-35804
Shriberg LD, Aram DM, Kwiatkowski J. Developmental apraxia of speech: I. Descriptive and theoretical perspectives. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1997; 40: 273-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4002.273
Lewis BA, Freebairn LA, Hansen AJ, Iyengar SK, Taylor HG. School-age follow-up of children with childhood apraxia of speech. Lang Speech Hearing Serv 2004; 35: 122-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2004/014)
Hall PK, Jordan LS, Robin DA. Developmental apraxia of speech: theory and clinical practice, 2nd ed. Austin: Pro-Ed 2007.
Maas E, Butalla CE, Farinella KA. Feedback frequency in treatment for childhood apraxia of speech. Am J Speech-Lang Pat 2012; 21: 239-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0119)
Maas E, Farinella KA. Random versus blocked practice in treatment for childhood apraxia of speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2012; 55: 561-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2011/11-0120)
Grigos MI, Kolenda N. The relationship between articulatory control and improved phonemic accuracy in childhood apraxia of speech: A longitudinal case study. Clin Linguist Phon 2010; 24: 17-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/02699200903329793
Nijland L, Maassen B, Van der Meulen S, Gabreëls F, Kraaimaat FW, Schreuder R. Coarticulation patterns in children with developmental apraxia of speech. Clin Linguist Phon 2010; 16: 461-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699200210159103
Murray E, McCabe P, Heard R, Ballard, KJ. Differential diagnosis of children with suspected childhood apraxia of speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2015; 58: 43-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-12-0358
Shriberg LD, Potter NL, Strand EA. Childhood apraxia of speech in children and adolescents with galactosemia. Paper presented at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association National Convention; November, New Orleans, LA 2009.
Shriberg LD, Potter NL, Strand EA. Prevalence and phenotype of childhood apraxia of speech in youth with galactosemia. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2011; 54: 487-519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0068)
Crary MA. Phonological characteristics of developmental verbal apraxia. Semin Speech Lang 1984; 5: 71-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0028-1082514
Yoss KA, Darley F. Developmental apraxia of speech in children with defective articulation. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1974; 17: 399-416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1703.399
Davis B, Velleman SL. Differential diagnosis and treatment of developmental apraxia of speech in infants and toddlers. Infant-Toddler Intervention: The Transdisciplinary Journal 2000; 10: 177-92.
Delaney AL, Kent RD. Developmental profiles of children diagnosed with apraxia of speech. The Annual American-Speech-Language-Hearing Association Conference. Philadelphia, PA 2004.
Shriberg LD, Kwiatkowski J. Developmental phonological disorders I: a clinical profile. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1994; 37: 1100-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3705.1100
Stackhouse J. Developmental verbal dyspraxia I: a review and critique. Int J Lang Commun Disord 1992; 27: 19-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/13682829209012027
Stackhouse J, Snowling M. Barriers to literacy development in two cases of developmental verbal dyspraxia: a longitudinal study. Cogn Neuropsychoi 1992; 9: 273-299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02643299208252062
Stackhouse J, Snowling M. Developmental verbal dyspraxia II: a developmental perspective on two case studies. Int J Lang Commun Disord 1992; 27: 35-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/13682829209012028
Marshalla P. Becoming verbal with childhood apraxia: new insights on Piaget for today’s therapy. Ashland: Marshalla Speech & Language Publisher 2001.
Strand EA. Treatment of motor speech disorders in children. Semin Speech Lang 1995; 16: 126-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1064115
Strand EA, Skinder A. Treatment of development apraxia of speech: integral stimulation methods. In: Caruso AJ, Strand EA. Clinical management of motor speech disorders in children (Eds.), New York: Thieme medical publisher 1999; 109-48.
Kim IS, LaPointe LL, Stierwalt JAG. Effect of feedback schedules and number of practice trials on motor retention of novel speech behaviors. Am J Speech-Lang Pat 2012; 21: 89-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2011/09-0082)
Maas E, Robin DA, Austermann Hula SN, Freedman SE, Wulf G, Ballard KJ, Schmidt RA. Principles of motor learning in treatment of motor speech disorders. Am J Speech-Lang Pat 2008; 17: 277-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2008/025)
Schmidt RA, Bjork RA. New conceptualizations of practice: common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychol Sci 1992; 3: 207-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00029.x
Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. 4th ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics 2005.
Newell KM. Knowledge of results and motor learning. In: Keogh L, Hutton RS (Eds.), Exerc Sport Sci Rev 1976; 195-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1249/00003677-197600040-00008
Schmidt RA. Motor Control and Learning. 2nd ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics 1988.
Wulf G, Schmidt RA, Deubel H. Reduced feed-back frequency enhances generalized motor program learning but not parameterization learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1993; 19: 1134-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.5.1134
Yao WX, Fischman MG, Wang TW. Motor skills acquisition and retention as a function of average feed-back, summary feedback, and performance variability. J Motor Behav 1994; 26: 273-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1994.9941683
Young DE, Schmidt RA. Augmented kinematic feedback for motor learning. J Motor Behav 1992; 24: 261-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1992.9941621
Anderson DI, Magill RA, Sekiya H. Motor learning as a function of KR schedule and characteristics of task-intrinsic feedback. J Motor Behav 2001; 33: 59-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222890109601903
Austermann Hula SN, Robin DA, Maas E, Ballard KJ, Schmidt RA. Effects of feedback frequency and timing on acquisition, retention, and transfer of speech skills in acquired apraxia of speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008; 51: 1088-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/06-0042)
Schmidt RA, Young DE, Swinnen S, Shapiro DC. Summary knowledge of results for skill acquisition: support for the guidance hypothesis. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1989; 15: 352-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.2.352
Wulf G, Schmidt RA. The learning of generalized motor programs: reducing the relative frequency of knowledge of results enhances memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1989; 15: 748-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.4.748
Winstein CJ, Schmidt RA. Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1990; 16: 677-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.16.4.677
Adams SG, Page AD. Effects of selected practice and feedback variables on speech motor learning. J Med Speech-Lang Pat 2000; 8: 215-20.
Adams S, Page A, Jog M. Summary feedback schedules and speech motor learning in Parkinson’s disease. J Med Speech-Lang Pat 2002; 10: 215-20.
Anderson DI, Magill RA, Sekiya H, Ryan G. Support for an explanation of the guidance effect in motor skill learning. J Motor Behav 2005; 37: 231-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JMBR.37.3.231-238
McNeil MR, Robin DA, Schmidt RA. Apraxia of speech: Definition, differentiation, and treatment. In: McNeil MR (Ed.), Clinical management of sensorimotor speech disorders 1997; 311-44.
Knock T, Ballard K, Robin D, Schmidt R. Influence of order of stimulus presentation on speech motor learning: a principled approach to treatment for apraxia of speech. Aphasiology 2000; 14: 653-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026870300401379
Edeal DM, Gildersleeve-Neumann CE. The importance of production frequency in therapy for childhood apraxia of speech. Am J Speech-Lang Pat 2011; 20: 95-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2011/09-0005)
Ballard KJ, Robin DA, McCabe P, McDonald J. A treatment for dysprosody in childhood apraxia of speech. J Speech-Lang Hear Res 2010; 53: 1227-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0130)
Friedman IB, Hancock AB, Schulz GS, Bamdad MJ. Using principles of motor learning to treat apraxia of speech after traumatic brain injury. J Med Speech-Lang Pat 2010; 18: 13-31.
Hageman CF, Simon P, Backer B, Burda AN. Comparing MIT and motor learning therapy in a nonfluent aphasia speaker. Annual meeting of the American Speech-Language Hearing Association. Atlanta, Georgia 2002.
Wambaugh JL, Martinez AL, McNeil MR, Rogers MA. Sound production treatment for apraxia of speech: overgeneralization and maintenance effects. Aphasiology 1999; 13: 821-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026870399401902
Wambaugh JL, Nessler C. Modification of sound production treatment for apraxia of speech: acquisition and generalisation effects. Aphasiology 2004; 18: 407-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02687030444000165
Lasker JP, Stierwalt JAG, Hageman CF, LaPointe LL. Using motor learning guided theory and augmentative and alternative communication to improve speech production in profound apraxia: a case example. J Med Speech-Lang Pat 2008; 16: 225-33.
Schmidt RA, Wrisberg CA. Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. 5th ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics 2011.
