Purpose: This systematic review aims to summarize and evaluate the available literature on speech and language therapy interventions for acquired apraxia of speech since 2012. Method: A systematic search in six electronic databases was performed from 2013 to 2020. The following primary outcomes were summarized: (a) improvement in targeted behaviors, (b) generalization, and (c) maintenance of outcomes. Moreover, studies were evaluated for the level of evidence and the clinical phase. Results: Of the 3,070 records identified, 27 studies were included in this review. The majority of the studies ( n = 22) used articulatory kinematic approaches followed by intersystemic facilitation/reorganization treatments ( n = 4) and other approaches ( n = 1). According to the classes defined in Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual (Gronseth et al., 2017), one was Class II, 10 were Class III, 10 were Class III-b (fulfill Class III criteria except for independence of assessors' criterion), and five were Class IV. In terms of clinical phase, one study classified as Phase III, 10 as Phase II, and 15 as Phase I. Conclusions: Among the interventions for apraxia of speech, articulatory kinematic treatments have become prominent over the last 8 years. Focusing on self-administrated therapies, use of technology for therapy administration and development of treatments that focus on apraxia of speech and aphasia simultaneously were identified as new advancements in the apraxia of speech literature. The methodological quality, clinical phase, and level of evidence of the studies have improved within the past 8 years. Large-scale randomized controlled trials for articulatory kinematic approaches and future studies on other treatment approaches are warranted. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.22223785

ObjectivesTo describe the rehabilitation services available for communication disorders in Sri Lanka and to estimate the adequacy of the services in provinces and districts of the country.SettingThe study considered government and private institutions, which provide rehabilitation services for communication disorders in Sri Lanka.ParticipantsInstitutions providing services of speech–language pathologists, audiologists and audiology technicians in Sri Lanka.Primary and secondary outcome measuresWe investigated the number of government hospitals and private institutions, which provide speech–language pathology and audiology services in Sri Lanka as the primary outcome measure. A number of speech–language pathologists, audiologists and audiology technicians working in the institutions were obtained from records and institution-based inquiries to identify the adequacy of the services in the country as the secondary outcome measure.ResultsOf the 647 government hospitals that provide free healthcare services in the country, 45 and 33 hospitals had speech and language therapy and audiology units, respectively. Government hospitals do not have audiologists but only have audiology technicians. The number of speech and language therapists and audiology technicians in the government sector per 100 000 population in the country was 0.44 and 0.18, respectively. There were wide variations in specialist to population ratio between districts. 77 private centres provide speech therapy services in 15 out of the 25 districts; 36 private centres provide audiological evaluations in 9 districts.ConclusionsThe number of specialist speech and language therapists and audiologists is not sufficient to provide adequate rehabilitation services for communications disorder for the Sri Lankan population. Not recruiting audiologists to the government sector affects the management of hearing impairment in the affected.

ObjectivesTo estimate the health burden of COVID-19 in Sri Lanka using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and to investigate how the burden varies across age groups and sex.Methods and analysisA retrospective study was conducted based on information obtained from the daily situation reports and monthly epidemiological reports issued by the Epidemiology Unit of the Ministry of Health, Sri Lanka. DALYs due to COVID-19 in Sri Lanka from 27 January 2020 to 30 June 2022 were estimated by age and sex. For the calculation, we also included the DALYs due to mild anxiety for the family members of the patients with COVID-19.ResultsThe total number of COVID-19 cases reported during this time period was 664 123, of which, 54% were males. There were 16 521 deaths reported giving a case fatality rate of 2.48%, which was higher in females as compared with males. The total years of life lost during this period is estimated to be 77 679 for males and 115 065 for females. The estimate of DALYs due to COVID-19 in Sri Lanka was 269 606 corresponding to 12.2 per 1000 population.ConclusionCompared with other countries, the burden of COVID-19 in Sri Lanka, as assessed by DALYs, was relatively low. This may be due to the country being an island and the strict rules imposed by the government to limit the spread of the disease. Assessing the impact of COVID-19 using only DALYs does not reflect the devastating economic and social consequences experienced by the country.