Stuttering therapy through telepractice in Turkey: A mixed method study

Abstract

Highlights Considering the quantitative findings, the telepractice and in-person groups showed a performance on an equivalent level. The greatest majority of the participants reported that they had adapted to telepractice and that this method was appropriate for them, despite barriers. For the clinician, loss of time, cost, and effort occurred more than expected for telepractice service. Some qualifications, such as experience, psychological factors, and lifestyle, have emerged as suitable candidate criteria for telepractice and the success of treatment. This delivery method can be a great alternative when in-person services cannot be carried out in circumstances such as rural life or global disasters like COVID-19 Pandemic.

Comprehensive Review of Factors Influencing the Use of Telepractice in Stuttering Treatment

“…A study conducted by Eslami Jahromi et al [ 27 ] showed that there was a significant difference in the mean scores of stuttering severity before and after telepractice and more than half of the patients were satisfied with this treatment method. Similarly, Cangi and Togram [ 4 ] showed that telepractice is as effective as in-person therapy for adults who stutter. However, there is a debate regarding economic factors.…”

“…Although face-to-face healthcare delivery is considered a routine way of service delivery, sometimes accessing in-person speech therapy services can be difficult [ 4 ]. Hence, telepractice can be regarded as an alternative or supplemental model for care delivery and can provide healthcare services at the point of need [ 4 , 5 ]. Moreover, remote follow-up can cause the least inconvenience in patients’ daily routines [ 6 ].…”

Comparing In-Person and Telepractice Service Delivery for Spoken Language Production and Comprehension Using the National Outcomes Measurement System

“…It is important to acknowledge that comparisons of telepractice and traditional modalities are being conducted for a variety of other intervention targets. There were multiple studies that focused on coaching models for treatment, often for early-language intervention ( Akemoglu et al, 2020 ; Baharav & Reiser, 2020 ; Behl et al, 2017 ). These tended to report similar outcomes or improved outcomes when using telepractice compared with in-person delivery.…”

“…Also notable, international researchers are asking many similar questions ( Cangi & Toğram, 2020 ; Fairweather et al, 2016 ; McCarthy et al, 2012 ; Rao et al, 2018 ; Shprintzen & Golding-Kushner, 2012 ). In general, these studies have found telepractice outcomes consistent with or better than in-person delivery.…”

Telepractice in School-age Children Who Stutter: A Controlled Before and After Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of MIDA-SP

“…The data collected showed comparable outcomes between the two modes of delivery. Cangi and Toğram (2020) investigated the effectiveness of stuttering treatment delivered by telepractice on a sample of 20 adults who stutter, comparing it with the same treatment delivered in-person. This was a non-inferiority-controlled trial.…”