Collaboration between stakeholders involved in augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) care of people without natural speech

References

• Alant, E., Champion, A., & Peabody, E. C. (2013). Exploring interagency collaboration in AAC intervention. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 34(3), 172–183. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740112455432
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amelung, V., Hildebrandt, H., & Wolf, S. (2012). Integrated care in Germany – A stony but necessary road! International Journal of Integrated Care, 12(1), Article e16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.853
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2002). Augmentative and alternative communication: Knowledge and skills for service delivery. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (Suppl), 22, 97–106. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/98ec/7f063e0095c483bf4c93888c00a41bda8bda.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Baxter, S., Enderby, P., Evans, P., & Judge, S. (2012). Barriers and facilitators to the use of high-technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 47(2), 115–129. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00090.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beukelman, D. R., Fager, S., Ball, L., & Dietz, A. (2007). AAC for adults with acquired neurological conditions: A review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23(3), 230–242. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610701553668
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (2013). Augmentative & alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs (4th ed.). Paul H. Brookes Pub.
   Google Scholar
• Binger, C., Ball, L., Dietz, A., Kent-Walsh, J., Lasker, J., Lund, S., McKelvey, M., & Quach, W. (2012). Personnel roles in the AAC assessment process. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28(4), 278–288. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2012.716079
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, Y. ‑. C., & Douglas, K. H. (2014). Communicative competence inventory for students who use augmentative and alternative communication. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 47(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914534620
   Google Scholar
• Chung, Y. ‑. C., & Stoner, J. B. (2016). A meta-synthesis of team members’ voices: What we need and what we do to support students who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32(3), 175–186. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2016.1213766
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creer, S., Enderby, P., Judge, S., & John, A. (2016). Prevalence of people who could benefit from augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) in the UK: Determining the need. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 51(6), 639–653. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12235
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Amour, D., Goulet, L., Labadie, J. F., Martín-Rodriguez, L. S., & Pineault, R. (2008). A model and typology of collaboration between professionals in healthcare organizations. BMC Health Services Research, 8, Article 188. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giel, B., & Liehs, A. (2016). ”Moderierte Runde Tische“ (MoRTi) in der Inklusion [“Moderated round tables” (MoRTi) in inclusive education]. Sprachtherapie Aktuell, 3(1), Article e2016–04. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14620/stadbs160904
   Google Scholar
• Goodman, E., Kuniavsky, M., & Moed, A. (2012). Observing the user experience: A practitioner’s guide to user research (2nd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Greenbaum, T. L. (1997). The handbook for focus group research (2nd ed.). SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Greenhalgh, T. (2008). Role of routines in collaborative work in healthcare organisations. BMJ, 337, Article a2448. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a2448
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harding, C., Lindsay, G., O’Brien, A., Dipper, L., & Wright, J. (2011). Implementing AAC with children with profound and multiple learning disabilities: A study in rationale underpinning intervention. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 11(2), 120–129. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01184.x
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., Müller, E., & Goetz, L. (2002). Collaborative teaming to support students with augmentative and alternative communication needs in general education classrooms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/aac.18.1.20.35
   Google Scholar
• Hwang, K., Johnston, M., Tulsky, D., Wood, K., Dyson-Hudson, T., & Komaroff, E. (2009). Access and coordination of health care service for people with disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 20(1), 28–34. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207308315564
   Google Scholar
• Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jirau-Rosaly, W., Brown, S. P., Wood, E. A., & Rockich-Winston, N. (2020). Integrating an interprofessional geriatric active learning workshop into undergraduate medical curriculum. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 7, 1–6. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/2382120520923680
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitzinger, J. (2006). Focus groups. In C. Pope & N. Mays (Eds.), Qualitative research in health care (3rd ed., pp. 21–31). Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Kitzinger, J., & Barbour, R. (1999). Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice. SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Kuckartz, U. (2016). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. Grundlagentexte Methoden [Qualitative content analysis: Methods, practice, software support. Fundamental texts on methods] (3rd ed.). Beltz Juventa.
   Google Scholar
• Lalani, M., Bussu, S., & Marshall, M. (2020). Understanding integrated care at the frontline using organisational learning theory: A participatory evaluation of multi-professional teams in East London. Social Science & Medicine, 262, Article 113254. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113254
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazar, J., Feng, J. H., & Hochheiser, H. (2017). Research methods in human-computer interaction (2nd ed.). Elsevier Morgan Kaufmann.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., & McNaughton, D. (2012). The changing face of augmentative and alternative communication: Past, present, and future challenges. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28(4), 197–204. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2012.737024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewenbrück, K. F., Stein, D. B., Amelung, V. E., Bitterlich, R., Brumme, M., Falkenburger, B., Fehre, A., Feige, T., Frank, A., Gißke, C., Helmert, C., Kerkemeyer, L., Knapp, A., Lang, C., Leuner, A., Lummer, C., Minkman, M. M. N., Müller, G., van Munster, M., Schlieter, H., Themann, P., Zonneveld, N. & Wolz, M. (2020). Parkinson network eastern Saxony (PANOS): Reaching consensus for a regional intersectoral integrated care concept for patients with Parkinson’s disease in the region of eastern Saxony, Germany. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9(9), Article 2906. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9092906
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, D. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research. SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, J., Lynch, Y., Meredith, S., Moulam, L., Goldbart, J., Smith, M., Randall, N., & Judge, S. (2019). Professionals’ decision-making in recommending communication aids in the UK: Competing considerations. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 35(3), 167–179. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2019.1597384
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2015). Improving diagnosis in health care (E. P. Balogh, B. T. Miller, & J. R. Ball Eds.). The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17226/21794.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Reeves, S., Lewin, S., Espin, S., & Zwarenstein, M. (2010). Interprofessional teamwork for health and social care. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444325027
   Google Scholar
• Sachse, S. (2010). Interventionsplanung in der Unterstützten Kommunikation: Aufgaben im Kontext der Beratung [Intervention planning in AAC: Tasks in the context of counseling]. von Loeper Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Schoen, C., Osborn, R., Squires, D., Doty, M., Pierson, R., & Applebaum, S. (2011). New 2011 survey of patients with complex care needs in eleven countries finds that care is often poorly coordinated. Health Afffairs, 30(12), 2437–2448. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0923
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sigafoos, J., & Drasgow, E. (2001). Conditional use of aided and unaided AAC. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16(3), 152–161. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/108835760101600303
   Google Scholar
• Snodgrass, M. R., & Meadan, H. (2018). A boy and his AAC team: Building instructional competence across team members. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 34(3), 167–179. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2018.1491059
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoner, J. B., Angell, M. E., & Bailey, R. L. (2010). Implementing augmentative and alternative communication in inclusive educational settings: A case study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 26(2), 122–135. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2010.481092
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subihi, A. S. (2013). Saudi special education student teachers’ knowledge of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). International Journal of Special Education, 28(3), 93–103. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1024412.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tsakitzidis, G., Timmermans, O., Callewaert, N., Verhoeven, V., Lopez-Hartmann, M., Truijen, S., Meulemans, H., & van Royen, P. (2016). Outcome indicators on interprofessional collaboration interventions for elderly. International Journal of Integrated Care, 16(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.2017
   Google Scholar
• Waller, A. (2013). Public policy issues in augmentative and alternative communication technologies a comparison of the U.K. and the U.S. Interactions, 20(3), 68–75. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/2451856.2451872
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, K. M., & Madel, M. (2019). Eye tracking measures reveal how changes in the design of displays for augmentative and alternative communication influence visual search in individuals with down syndrome or autism spectrum disorder. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 28(4), 1649–1658. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_AJSLP-19-0006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. (2010). Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice (D. Hopkins Eds.). https://www.who.int/hrh/resources/framework_action/en/
   Google Scholar
• Zinkevich, A., Uthoff, S. A. K., Boenisch, J., Sachse, S. K., Bernasconi, T., & Ansmann, L. (2019). Complex intervention in augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) care in Germany: A study protocol of an evaluation study with a controlled mixed-methods design. BMJ Open, 9(8), Article e029469. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029469
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar