Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Parent-Child Interaction in School Aged Children with SLI. By Jessica Allen & Chloe Marshall.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Parent-Child Interaction in School Aged Children with SLI. By Jessica Allen & Chloe Marshall."— Presentation transcript:

1 Parent-Child Interaction in School Aged Children with SLI. By Jessica Allen & Chloe Marshall

2 Background to the Research Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) has been used in clinic settings with pre-school children. Extensive research to evidence it’s success. Direct 1:1 therapy with children in mainstream school and language settings with limited opportunities to liaise with parents. Limited research available as to the use of PCIT with school age children.

3 Participants Children aged between 8-10 years, Diagnosed with SLI (as described in local service policy), Attending mainstream schools or language units, English as first language Current levels of intervention were maintained through the study which varied from programmes carried out by Teaching Assistants (TAs), group sessions in school or clinic and direct 1:1 therapy.

4 Design A total of 16 families were recruited to take part in the study. These were randomly assigned into the treated or control group (delayed treatment). The treated group then began the 4 weekly sessions of PCIT followed by a 6 week consolidation period, before being invited back for a review session.

5 PCIT Procedure Block of 4, once weekly PCIT session carried out in a clinic room with a range of toys and activities. In the initial session the parents were asked to complete a questionnaire. They were then asked to play/carry out an activity with their child for 15 minutes whilst being videoed. The video was then watched together and discussed. A self rating scale was introduced and the relevance of each area being targeted discussed. The parent was then asked to choose an area they would like to target first. How this could be achieved was discussed.

6 A second video was then taken and the parent asked to use the strategy discussed. The video was watched again, highlighting the positive use of the strategy and how it could be further developed. The parent was asked to implement this strategy at least 3 time per week for 5 minutes to practice, known as ‘special time’. During the next session a video was taken to review progress. If the goal had been achieved another area would be chosen to target.

7 6 Week consolidation period. In the final session after 6 weeks another video was taken to review progress and the parents completed the questionnaire.

8 If both parents attended the PCIT sessions then they were videoed separately and individual targets chosen. Prior to the study one parent was randomly selected as the ‘lead adult’ to allow the child’s progress to be monitored.

9 Control Group The control group attended an initial session where they were videoed playing/carrying out an activity and the parents completed the questionnaire. They were then seen again at the same time as the final forth session and after the 6 week consolidation period. At these times they were videoed and the parent questionnaire completed at the final review session.

10 PCIT Timetable Group AGroup B Week 1 Parent and child interaction videoed, followed by SLT input (1 st PCIT session) Video Analysed Parent and child interaction videoed, no SLT input. Video Analysed Week 22 nd PCIT session Week 33 rd PCIT session Week 4 4 th PCIT session Video Analysed Parent and child interaction videoed, no SLT input. Video Analysed Week 5-9Consolidation period, no therapist input. Week 10Final PCIT session Video Analysed Parent and child interaction videoed, no SLT input. Video Analysed

11 Analysis of the video Each video recording lasted 15 minutes and the middle 5 minutes were analysed to monitor the child’s progress in terms of; 1.Number of verbal initiations 2.Number of verbal responses 3.Number of non-verbal responses 4.Number of verbalisations to self 5.Mean length of utterance 6.Proportion of parent to child utterances. (Law et. al., 1999) Analysed pre-therapy, post-therapy and at the final session. The communication parameters were analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Each of the communication parameters was subjected to a Two-Way Analysis of Variance in a 3 (pre/post/final) x2 (treated/control) design.

12 Analysis of the Parent Questionnaire The parent questionnaires were analysed statistically using t- tests to determine any significant differences in response before therapy and after therapy had been completed.

13 Result Summary Verbal Initiations Significant increase in the number of verbal initiations in treated group at all time intervals, and no significant effect over time in the control group.

14 Verbal Responses Number does increase over time in the treated group, but not statistically so should be treated with caution.

15 Non-verbal responses No statistical differences

16 Mean Length of Utterances Indicates PCIT has a measurable effect on morphosyntactic quality over time in the treated group.

17 Proportion of Child to Parent Utterance Significantly more child to adult utterances over time in the treated group.

18 In the questionnaire there was statistical difference in the change in response of questions 1-10, i.e. About the adult’s communication skills Greater statistical change in response for the treated group than control group in 4/7 questions about their child’s communication skills. Parental feedback also gained.

19 Further uses and Development of PCIT Use in bilingual families?  Awareness of cultural differences?  Appropriate communication parameters, e.g. MLU? Use in schools/nursery setting? Analysing single case studies?

20 Jessica@AllenSpeechandLanguage.co.uk www.AllenSpeechandLanguage.co.uk


Download ppt "Parent-Child Interaction in School Aged Children with SLI. By Jessica Allen & Chloe Marshall."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google