Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2021 Feb;89(3):613-621.
doi: 10.1038/s41390-020-0924-4. Epub 2020 May 1.

PROMPT intervention for children with severe speech motor delay: a randomized control trial

Aravind K Namasivayam  1   2 , Anna Huynh  3 , Francesca Granata  3 , Vina Law  3 , Pascal van Lieshout  3   4   5
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

PROMPT intervention for children with severe speech motor delay: a randomized control trial

Aravind K Namasivayam et al. Pediatr Res. 2021 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Currently, there is limited information on the intervention efficacy for children with speech motor delay (SMD). This randomized control trial (RCT) study examined the effectiveness of Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets (PROMPT) intervention to improve the outcomes in children with SMD. We hypothesized that children with SMD receiving PROMPT intervention would improve more in the measured outcomes than those waitlisted and receiving home training.

Methods: Using a two-arm, parallel group, RCT, 49 children with SMD were allocated to either an intervention group (N = 24) that received 45 min of PROMPT intervention two times a week for 10 weeks or were waitlisted for the same duration and received only home training instructions (N = 25). Outcome measures for speech motor control, articulation, speech intelligibility (word and sentence levels), and functional communication were assessed at baseline and at a 10-week follow-up.

Results: PROMPT intervention was associated with notable improvements in speech motor control, speech articulation, and word-level speech intelligibility. Intervention allocation yielded weak improvements in sentence-level speech intelligibility and functional communication.

Conclusions: PROMPT intervention is a clinically effective intervention approach for children with SMD.

Impact: Currently, there is limited information on the intervention efficacy for children with SMD. We report on the findings of a phase III intervention efficacy study on children with SMD using an RCT design. PROMPT intervention is a clinically effective intervention approach for children with SMD. Results of the study will be fundamental to the delivery of effective services for this population. These findings may facilitate the development of an evidence-based care pathway for children with severe speech sound disorders.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The study was funded by the PROMPT Institute, Santa Fe, NM, USA. However, the funding agency was not involved in the study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Outcome measures.
Different outcome measures used to assess the body structures and functions, and activities and participation levels for the WHO-ICF-CY framework. See section on “Outcomes measures” for further details. a Verbal Motor Production Assessment for Children – Focal Oromotor Control. b Verbal Motor Production Assessment for Children – Sequencing. c Probe Words. d Single-word articulation assessment subtest of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation & Phonology test (DEAP). e PCC, percentage of consonants correct derived from the DEAP test. f Single-word phonology assessment subtest of the DEAP. g Children’s Speech Intelligibility Measure (CSIM). h Beginner’s Intelligibility Test (BIT). i Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six tool (FOCUS).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flow diagram.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Shriberg LD, et al. Extensions to the speech disorders classification system (SDCS) Clin. Linguist. Phon. 2010;24:795–824. doi: 10.3109/02699206.2010.503006. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shriberg LD, Kwiatkowski J, Mabie HL. Estimates of the prevalence of motor speech disorders in children with idiopathic speech delay. Clin. Linguist. Phon. 2019;33:679–706. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2019.1595731. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Namasivayam AK, et al. Investigating intervention dose frequency for children with speech sound disorders and motor speech involvement. Int. J. Lang. Commun. Disord. 2019;54:673–686. - PubMed
    1. Hayden, D., Eigen, J., Walker, A. & Olsen, L. in Interventions for Speech Sound Disorders in Children (eds Williams, L., McLeod, S., & McCauley, R.) (Brookes, Baltimore, 2010).
    1. Namasivayam AK, et al. Relationship between speech motor control and speech intelligibility in children with speech sound disorders. J. Commun. Disord. 2013;46:264–280. doi: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2013.02.003. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types