Subtract before You Add: Towards the Development of a De-Implementation Approach in School-Based Speech Sound Therapy

Purpose: It is often difficult for school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to prioritize implementing new practices for children with speech sound disorders (SSDs), given burgeoning caseloads and the myriad of other workload tasks. We propose that de-implementation science (e.g., Davidson e...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inGrantee Submission
Main Authors Farquharson, Kelly, Cabbage, Kathryn L, Reed, Anne C, Moody, Mary Allison
Format Report
LanguageEnglish
Published 05.09.2023
Subjects
Online AccessGet more information

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Purpose: It is often difficult for school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to prioritize implementing new practices for children with speech sound disorders (SSDs), given burgeoning caseloads and the myriad of other workload tasks. We propose that de-implementation science (e.g., Davidson et al. 2017) is equally as important as implementation science. De-implementation science is the recognition and identification of areas that are of "low-value and wasteful" (Davidson et al., 2017, p. 463). Critically, the idea of de-implementation suggests that we first remove something from a clinician's workload before requesting that they learn and implement something new. Method: Situated within the SHARE framework, we review de-implementation science and current speech-sound therapy literature to understand the mechanisms behind continuous use of practices that are no longer supported by science or legislation. We use vignettes to highlight real-life examples that clinicians may be facing in school-based settings and to provide hypothetical solutions, resources, and/ or next steps to these common challenges. Results: We identified four primary practices that can be de-implemented to make space for new evidence-based techniques and approaches: 1) over-reliance on speech sound norms for eligibility determinations; 2) the omission of phonological processing skills within evaluations; 3) homogeneity of service delivery factors; and 4) the use of only one treatment approach for all children with SSDs. Conclusions: School-based SLPs are busy, overwhelmed, and burned out (Marante & Farquharson, 2020). Although de-implementation will take work and may lead to some difficult discussions, the end result should be a reduction in SLPs' workloads and improved outcomes for children with speech sound disorders. [This paper was published in "Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools" v54 n4 2023.]
DOI:10.1044/2023_LSHSS-22-00176