Speech and language pathologists’ perceptions and practises of communication partner training to support children’s communication with high-tech speech generating devices

References

• Dietz A, Quach W, Lund SK, et al. AAC assessment and clinical-decision making: the impact of experience. Augment Altern Commun. 2012;28:148–159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson K, Balandin S, Stancliffe R. Australian parents’ experiences of speech generating device (SGD) service delivery. Dev Neurorehabil. 2014;17:75–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay S. Perceptions of health care workers prescribing augmentative and alternative communication devices to children. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2010;5:209–222.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnson J, Inglebret E, Jones C, et al. Perspectives of speech language pathologists regarding success versus abandonment of AAC. Augment Altern Commun. 2006;22:85–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costigan FA, Light J. A review of preservice training in augmentative and alternative communication for speech-language pathologists, special education teachers, and occupational therapists. Assist Technology. 2010;22:200–212. quiz 213–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Connor S, Pettigrew CM. The barriers perceived to prevent the successful implementation of evidence-based practice by speech and language therapists. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2009;44:1018–1035.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Bortoli T, Arthur-Kelly M, Mathisen B, et al. Speech-language pathologists ’ perceptions of implementing communication intervention with students with multiple and severe disabilities. Augment Altern Commun. 2014;30:55–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iacono T, Cameron M. Australian speech-language pathologists' perceptions and experiences of augmentative and alternative communication in early childhood intervention. Augment Altern Commun. 2009;25:236–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wandin H, Lindberg P, Sonnander K. Communication intervention in rett syndrome: a survey of speech language pathologists in swedish health services. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37:1324–1333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leevers HJ, Roesler CP, Flax J, et al. The carter neurocognitive assessment for children with severely compromised expressive language and motor skills. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005;46:287–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geytenbeek JJ, Vermeulen RJ, Becher JG, et al. Comprehension of spoken language in non-speaking children with severe cerebral palsy: an explorative study on associations with motor type and disabilities. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2015;57:294–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh J, Murza KA, Malani MD, et al. Effects of communication partner instruction on the communication of individuals using aac: a meta-analysis. Augment Altern Commun. 2015;31:1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light J, McNaughton D. Putting people first: re-thinking the role of technology in augmentative and alternative communication intervention. Augment Altern Commun. 2013;29:299–309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingham MA, Spooner F, Browder D. Training paraeducators to promote the use of augmentative and alternative communication by students with significant disabilities. Educ Train Dev Disabil. 2007;42:339–352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binger C, Light J. The effect of aided aac modeling on the expression of multi-symbol messages by preschoolers who use aac. Augment Altern Commun. 2007;23:30–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser A, Hancock T. Teaching partens new skills to support their young children´s development. Infants and Young Children. 2003;16:9–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballin L, Balandin S, Stancliffe R. The speech-generating device (sgd) mentoring program: training adults who use an sgd to mentor. Augment Altern Commun. 2012;28:254–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sevcik RA, Romski MA, Adamson LB. Research directions in augmentative and alternative communication for preschool children. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26:1323–1329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayes D, Heath A, Williams C, et al. Pardon the interruption enhancing communication skills for students with intellectual disability. Teaching Exceptional Children. 2013;45:64–70.
   Google Scholar
• Carter M, Grumsell J. The behaviour chain interruption strategy: a review of research and discussion of future directions. Res Prac Pers Severe Dis. 2001;26:37–49.
   Google Scholar
• Pennington L, Thomson K. It takes two to talk–the hanen program and families of children with motor disorders: a uk perspective. Child Care Health Dev. 2007;33:691–702.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonsson A, Kristoffersson L, Ferm U, et al. The comalong communication boards: parents' use and experiences of aided language stimulation. Augment Altern Commun. 2011;27:103–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rispoli M, Franco J, van der Meer L, et al. The use of speech generating devices in communication interventions for individuals with developmental disabilities: a review of the literature. Dev Neurorehabil. 2010;13:276–293.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosser RW, Koul RK. Speech output technologies in interventions for individuals with autism spectrum disorders: a scoping review. Augment Altern Commun. 2015;31:1–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caron J, Light J. “Social media has opened a world of ‘open communication:’” Experiences of adults with cerebral palsy who use augmentative and alternative communication and social media. Augment Altern Commun. 2015;32:1–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNaughton D, Rackensperger T, Benedek-Wood E, et al. “A child needs to be given a chance to succeed”: partents of individuals who use aac describe the benefits and callenges of learning aac technologies. Augment Altern Commun. 2008;24:43–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Niekerk K, Tonsing K. Eye gaze technology: a south african perspective. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2015;10:340–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke McConachie H, Price K, et al. Views of young people using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2001;36:107–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey R, Parette H, Stoner J, et al. Family members´ perceptions of augmentative and alternative communication device use. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2006a;37:50–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballin L, Balandin S, Stancliffe R, et al. Speech-language pathologists’ views on mentoring by people who use speech generating devices. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2011;13:446–457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeglinsky I, Salminen AL, Carlberg EB, et al. Rehabilitation planning for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Rehabil Med. 2012;5:203–215.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kiresuk TJ, Smith A, Cardillo JE. Goal attainment scaling: applications, theory, and measurement. Hillsdale (N.J.): L. Erlbaum Associates; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser RW. Goal attainment scaling as a clinical measurement technique in communication disorders: a critical review. J Commun Disord. 2004;37:217–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palisano RJ, Chiarello LA, King GA, et al. Participation-based therapy for children with physical disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34:1041–1052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granlund M, Bjorck-Akesson E, Wilder J, et al. AAC interventions for children in a family environment: implementing evidence in practice. Augment Altern Commun. 2008;24:207–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The National Board of Health and Welfare [Internet]. Förskrivning av hjälpmedel. Stöd vid förskrivning av hjälpmedel till personer med funktionsnedsättning. [Prescription of Assistive Technology. Support for prescription of Assistive Technology to individuals with disability.] Falun 2016 [Internet]. Available from http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/disability. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Beukelman D, Mirenda P. Augmentative and alternative communication: supporting children & adults with complex communication needs. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Borgestig M, Sandqvist J, Ahlsten G, et al. Gaze-based assistive technology in daily activities in children with severe physical impairments-an intervention study. Dev Neurorehabil. 2016;20:1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novac I, Hines M, Goldsmith S, et al. Clinical prognostic messages from a systematic review on cerebral palsy. Pediatrics. 2012;130:1–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tasse MJ, Luckasson R, Nygren M. Aaidd proposed recommendations for icd-11 and the condition previously known as mental retardation. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2013;51:127–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetzchner S, Brekke KM, Sjøthun B, et al. Constructing preschool communities of learners that afford alternative language development. Augment Altern Commun. 2005;21:82–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Compagnone E, Maniglio J, Camposeo S, et al. Functional classifications for cerebral palsy: correlations between the gross motor function classification system (GMFCS), the manual ability classification system (MACS) and the communication function classification system (CFCS). Res Dev Disabil. 2014;2651–2657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SurveyMonkey Inc. [Internet].San Mateo, California, USA; [cited 2015 Sep 25]. Available from:http://www.surveymonkey.com
   Google Scholar
• About codex [Internet]: Uppsala University. June 2016 Last Accessed 7 June 2016 - [cited 10 June 2011]; Available from: http://www.codex.vr.se/en/omcodex.shtml
   Google Scholar
• Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15:1277–1288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. International classification of functioning, disability and health: children & youth version: Icf-cy. 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Pless M, Granlund M. Implementation of the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF) and the ICF children and youth version (ICF-CY) within the context of augmentative and alternative communication. Augment Altern Commun. 2012;28:11–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klang N, Rowland C, Fried-Oken M, et al. The content of goals in individual educational programs for students with complex communication needs. Augment Altern Commun. 2016;32:41–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urbanowicz A, Leonard H, Girdler S, et al. Parental perspectives on the communication abilities of their daughters with rett syndrome. Dev Neurorehabil. 2016;19:17–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey R, Stoner J, Parette H, et al. AAC team perceptions: augmentative and alternative communication device use. Educ Train Develop Disabil. 2006b;41:139–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar