Arnott et al. (2014)27
English |
To investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of the standard LP treatment in comparison with the group approach to the same program. |
54 children randomly allocated into 2 groups: - Control group (individual approach): 27 children: 10 were 3.0 - 3.11 years, another 10 were 4.0 - 4.11 years, and 7 were 5.0 - 5.11 years old. - Experimental group (group approach): 27 children: 13 were 3.0 - 3.11 years, 12 were 4.0 - 4.11 years, and 2 were 5.0 - 5.11 years old.
The group approach had a rotating design so there were three parent-child pairs per group visit. |
- The professional’s hours per child by stage 2. - Number of visits to the clinic and weeks until stage 2. - %SS obtained from two 10-minute speech samples. - Parent-reported SR. - Final questionnaire: at the end of stage 1, the parents answered a questionnaire on their experience with the treatment and satisfaction with the service. They classified the items on a 9-point scale, in which 1=totally disagree and 9=totally agree. They could also write down additional comments. |
Three moments: Before randomization, 9, and 18 months after randomization. |
Donaghy et al. (2015)26
English |
To observe the contribution of parental self-correction verbal contingencies in LP. 38 pairs distributed into 2 groups: - Experimental group: 19 parent-child pairs receiving LP, but with no self-correction verbal contingencies. - Control group: 19 parent-child pairs receiving LP as proposed. Children were 2.10 to 5.10 years old. - Number of visits to the clinic. - Number of weeks taken to reduce stuttering by 50%. - %SS. - SR. Three moments: initial, when %SS had decreased by 50% when progress had been observed for 3 consecutive weeks. |
de Sonneville- Koedoot, Stolk et al. (2015)12
Dutch |
To compare the effectiveness of LP direct treatment with RESTART-DCM indirect one in stuttering preschoolers in an 18-month follow-up. |
199 children randomly allocated into 2 groups: - LP treatment: 98 children; 41 were 3 years, 39 were 4 years, and 18 were 5 to 6 years old (one child was 2.11 years at inclusion). - RESTART-DCM treatment: 100 children; 37 were 3 years, 31 were 4 years, and 32 were 5 to 6 years old. |
- Percentage of children who did not stutter 18 months after beginning the therapy. - %SS. - SR (8-point scale). - Professional- and child-reported stuttering severity rate (8-point scale for professionals and 4-point scale for children). - Parental assessment of their children’s health-related quality of life - Children’s attitude toward speech (KiddyCAT). - Emotional and behavioral problems (Child Behavior Checklist) |
Five moments: At the beginning of the study, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after beginning the treatment. |
Guitar et al. (2015)33
English |
To investigate the duration and results of LP applied to a new sample and compare it to the original sample published by Miller and Guitar (2009). To investigate predictive factors of the duration and results of LP, combining data from both samples. |
29 children divided into 2 groups: - New sample: 14 children aged 3.4 to 6.2 years. - Original sample: 15 children aged 2.5 to 5.9 years. |
- %SS. - Stuttering severity instrument-3 (SSI-3) |
Three moments: Pretreatment, during the treatment, and in the long run, approximately 2 years after finishing LP stage 1 (median of 26 months). |
de Sonneville-Koedoot, Bouwman et al. (2015)30
Dutch |
To determine the incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of LP in comparison with RESTART-DCM for stuttering preschoolers. |
199 children randomly allocated into 2 groups: - LP treatment: 98 children; 41 were 3 years, 39 were 4 years, and 18 were 5 to 6 years old (one child was 2.11 years at inclusion). - RESTART-DCM treatment: 100 children; 37 were 3 years, 31 were 4 years, and 32 were 5 to 6 years old. |
- %SS obtained from 3 conversational speech samples. - NNT: mean number of patients who need to be treated for one patient to be benefitted. - Health-related quality of life. - Direct and indirect costs measured with cost questionnaires. |
Five moments: At the beginning of the study, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after beginning the treatment. |
McCulloch et al. (2016)29
English |
To compare LP treatment in children that attended a student-led clinic with previously published references regarding LP treatment not conducted in a student-led clinic. |
40 patients. |
- %SS - SR - Duration of the therapy. |
Two moments: Initial and final assessment. |
Bridgman et al. (2016)31
English |
To compare LP results in in-person visits and teletherapy in early stuttering. |
49 children randomly allocated into 2 groups: - Clinic: 24 children aged 3.1 to 5.11 years. - Teletherapy: 25 children aged 3.0 to 5.5 years. |
- %SS - SR |
Three moments: Pretreatment, 9, and 18 months after beginning LP treatment. |
Sawyer et al. (2017)32
English |
To investigate the effects of training on reducing the AR of caregivers of stuttering children, on the dysfluency of the children, on the AR of children and caregivers, and the RLT of children and caregivers. |
17 mother/father-child pairs. The children were 31 to 66 months old. |
- Percentage of stuttering dysfluencies in children per 100 syllables was assessed. - AR measured in syllables per second. - Latency time. - In home interaction, parents were expected to record the date, description of the activity, and comments or feelings. |
Three moments: At the beginning of the first session, a sample of the caregiver-child interaction was taken. In the third session, samples of caregiver-child interactions were taken - for the first one, in the beginning, they were asked to “interact as usual”; then, after feedback on this interaction, they were asked to talk slowly and relaxed for the second sample. |
Ferdinands et al. (2018)28
English |
To determine whether stuttering severity correlates with parental satisfaction with their children’s fluency in LP treatment. To demonstrate that parental satisfaction is not smaller in either teletherapy or in-person therapy in LP clinic. |
49 children randomly allocated into 2 groups:
- Clinic: 24 children aged 3.1 to 5.11 years. - Teletherapy: 25 children aged 3.0 to 5.5 years. |
- %SS - SR - Parental satisfaction with child fluency (PSCF), based on the answer to the question: “Are you satisfied with your child’s current level of fluency?”. The answers were measured on a 10-point Likert scale. |
Three moments: Pretreatment, 9, and 18 months after beginning LP treatment. |
Millard et al. (2018)13
English |
To explore the effectiveness of the Palin PCI therapy in a large cohort of stuttering children |
48 children aged 2.5 to 7 years. |
- %SS. - The children’s communicative attitudes (KiddyCAT). - Parental perception of stuttering and degree of impact with Palin parental rating scale. |
Four moments: At the beginning of the therapy, 3, 6, and 12 months after beginning the therapy. |
Druker et al. (2019)25
English |
To explore the effects of approaching self-regulation as a component in stuttering treatment on both the children’s fluency and the parents’ and children’s psychosocial results. |
28 pairs distributed into 2 groups: - Experimental group: 14 caregiver-stuttering child pairs, who received fluency therapy with a resilience component. The children were 3 to 6 years old, with a mean of 4.25 years. - Control group: 14 caregiver-stuttering child pairs, who received only the fluency therapy. The children were 3 to 6 years old, with a mean of 4.44 years. |
- Stuttered Severity Rating for children. - Parenting and Family Adjustment Scales for parents, though it analyzes both parents and children. - The Parenting and Family Adjustment Scales applied to parents. - The effortful control subscale - Curtin Early Childhood Stuttering Resilience Scale. |
Two moments: Pre- and post-treatment. |