Children with severe motor impairments who need augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) comprise a heterogeneous group with wide variability in cognitive functioning. Assessment of language comprehension will help find the best possible communication solution for each child, but there is a lack of appropriate instruments. This study investigates the reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the spoken language comprehension test C-BiLLT (computer-based instrument for low motor language testing)the C-BiLLT-Norand whether response modality influences test results. The participants were 238 children with typical development aged 1;2 to 7;10 (years/months) who were assessed with the C-BiLLT-Nor and tests of language comprehension and non-verbal reasoning. There was excellent internal consistency and good test-retest reliability. Tests of language comprehension and non-verbal reasoning correlated significantly with the C-BiLLT-Nor, indicating good construct validity. Factor analysis yielded a two-factor solution, suggesting it as a measure of receptive vocabulary, grammar, and overall language comprehension. No difference in results could be related to response mode, implying that gaze pointing is a viable option for children who cannot point with a finger. The C-BiLLT-Nor, with norms from 1;6-7;6 is a reliable measure of language comprehension.

The authors would like to thank all participating clinicians for sharing their experiences and expertise, Johanna Geytenbeek for sharing her database of names, Samantha Yimeng Dong for the illustration, and Audrée Leclerc for her help with reliability coding. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Background It is challenging to reliably assess the language comprehension of children with severe motor and speech impairments using traditional assessment tools. The Computer Based instrument for Low motor Language Testing (C-BiLLT) aims to reduce barriers to evidence-based assessment for this population by allowing children to access the test using non-traditional methods such as eye gaze so they can independently respond to test items. The purpose of this study is to develop a contextualized understanding of the factors that influenced clinicians’ implementation of the C-BILLT in practice in the Netherlands and Norway. Materials and methods A qualitative approach including semi-structured individual interviews with 15 clinicians (speech-language pathologists, neuropsychologists, and one teacher, counsellor, and vision specialist) was used. Data analysis was conducted in two rounds. First, a deductive approach including a codebook was used to code data within the COM-B components describing clinicians’ capability, opportunity, and motivation for behaviour change. Then, an abductive approach applying thematic analysis was used to identify meaningful patterns within the COM-B components. Results Several meaningful barriers and facilitators were identified across the data. Clinicians used the C-BiLLT with two distinct groups of clients: (1) the population it was originally developed for, and (2) clients that could have also been assessed using a traditional language test. Clinicians working with the first group experienced more, and more complex barriers across all COM-B components, to successful C-BiLLT use than the latter. Conclusion This study provides timely insights into the capability, opportunity, and motivation factors important for creating and sustaining assessment behaviour change in clinicians who used or attempted to use the C-BiLLT. Potential tailored intervention strategies aimed at improving implementation of novel assessment tools are discussed and may be helpful for others working to improve service delivery for children with complex needs.