Health-Related Quality of Life of Children with Specific Language Impairment Aged 8–11

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate, in a clinical sample of children with a diagnosis of specific language impairment (SLI), the health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Subjects and Methods: Fifty-five children, aged 8–11 years, filled out a generic HRQoL questionnaire, 17D, and another questionnaire about school and rehabilitation. The HRQoL comparison group was a sample of 244 typically developing schoolchildren. Results: Response rate was 86%. Of the respondents, 80% were male. The total 17D score of the subjects did not differ from that of controls. The 17D profiles of the groups differed on several dimensions, but significant differences emerged only on the dimensions concerning speech, where the study group was worse off, and sleep, where the controls reported more problems. Respondents with low verbal IQ reported more distress. The vast majority of respondents were in special education or received extra educational support and one-third were still having speech therapy. Conclusion: In this clinical sample, despite the persisting need for extra support, the overall well-being of children with SLI was at age level. Still, some differences existed, and HRQoL measurement may prove a good tool for professionals to find those children with SLI at risk for diminished well-being and for later problems.

Measuring quality of life in children with speech and language difficulties: a systematic review of existing approaches

“…Interestingly, although there was a difference in the speech domain, this failed to reach statistical significance once the p-value threshold was adjusted for multiple comparisons (p=0.023). In the next study (Arkkila et al, 2011), a sample of children aged 8 to 11 years were compared to a population sample using 17D. Again, there was no significant difference between the SLI and control samples on overall scores (SLI: 0.9337; control: 0.9333).…”

“…Willems et al (Willems et al, 2009), by contrast, showed that the generic EQ-5D had a poor ability to discriminate children with SaLD from the general population, and was better placed to assess the health utilities of children with rheumatic disorders. Arkkila et al (Arkkila et al, 2009;Arkkila et al, 2011) reported mixed findings on the 16D and17D measures, respectively, with both measures performing poorly on discriminating children with SLI from the general population on overall health utility scores, yet also showing some ability to discriminate children with SLI on some domains. Furthermore, no single study has compared three or more generic preference-based instruments alongside each other.…”

“…Also identified was a prospective cohort study (McDougall, Wright, Miller, & Nichols, 2012), and a scale development study (Thomas-Stonell, Oddson, Robertson, & Rosenbaum, 2010). The most commonly examined populations were children and/or adolescents with autism/asperger syndrome (Kuhlthau et al, 2010;Lee, Harrington, Louie, & Newschaffer, 2008;McDougall et al, 2012;Thomas-Stonell et al, 2010;Tilford et al, 2012), cerebral palsy (Majnemer, Shevell, Law, Poulin, & Rosenbaum, 2008;Petrou & Kupek, 2009;Thomas-Stonell et al, 2010;Keskin, Gunel, & Aktan, 2012), and specific language impairment (Arkkila et al, 2009;Arkkila et al, 2011;Flapper & Van den Heuvel, 2011;Flapper & Schoemaker, 2013). A number of studies described the QoL of children with SaLD alongside other chronic conditions (Lee et al, 2008;McDougall et al, 2012) (Willems et al, 2009).…”

“…Five studies used five preference-based measures; they were: (Arkkila et al, 2009) (Arkkila et al, 2011;Petrou & Kupek, 2009;Tilford et al, 2012). The Petrou and Kupeck study drew on data from a nationwide, UK-based survey ("Disability Survey 2000: Survey of Young People With a Disability and Sport") to estimate health utilities associated with a large range of chronic childhood conditions.…”

“…Consequently, Tilford et al (Tilford et al, 2012) suggest that, while there was indication of construct validity for both scales, the HUI3 is likely to be a better instrument for estimating any quality of life gains among children with ASD, and is also better placed to capture health states associated with language impairment. Arkkila et al performed two studies (Arkkila et al, 2009) (Arkkila et al, 2011) to explore the viability of the 16D and 17D, respectively, for comparing the HRQoL of adolescents and children with specific language impairment (SLI) with typically developing peers. In the first of these studies (Arkkila et al, 2009), the 16D was mailed to adolescents with SLI, with responses being obtained for 49 participants (73% response rate).…”