A Scoping Review of the Evidence on Disability Accommodations Targeting Equitable Communication Access in Health Care.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Jennifer Y Oshita, Megan E Schliep, Natalie F Douglas, Liliane B Savard, Julie L Feuerstein, Charles D MacLean, Megan A Morris
{"title":"A Scoping Review of the Evidence on Disability Accommodations Targeting Equitable Communication Access in Health Care.","authors":"Jennifer Y Oshita, Megan E Schliep, Natalie F Douglas, Liliane B Savard, Julie L Feuerstein, Charles D MacLean, Megan A Morris","doi":"10.1044/2024_AJSLP-24-00234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 protects the civil rights of people with disabilities, including their right to effective communication and equitable health care access through accommodations. The ADA website lists examples of accommodations (e.g., qualified notetaker, hearing amplifiers, cued speech interpreters), but no literature is cited to support this list. Scientific evidence is critical to advancing both the effectiveness and widespread implementation of accommodations. We scoped the literature on interventions supporting equitable communication access (accommodations) for adults with communication disabilities (CDs) in health care settings. We asked what accommodations have been studied, for what CD populations, and how they have been studied.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We used a scoping review approach and conducted searches using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts indexed between January 1, 2003, and August 1, 2024. Data on accommodation type, CD-related health condition, setting, health care workers involved, evidence type, study design, and outcome were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Screening of 1,614 articles identified 58 investigations of 10 communication accommodations in health care settings. The range in number of publications rose from 0-2 to 2-9 over the 11-year period. The three most studied accommodations were <i>customized plan</i>, <i>communication strategies</i>, and <i>augmentative and alternative communication aids</i> (each 21%-22% of studies). Most investigations addressed populations with single CD-related conditions (e.g., aphasia), were descriptive (52%), and had sample sizes ≤ 50 participants. Speech-language pathologists infrequently provided or implemented accommodations (12% of all health care workers involved, by type of worker). Findings were typically positive, but outcome measures were heterogeneous.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 10 researched accommodations addressed a wider range of CD populations as compared to accommodations found in policy documents, highlighting an opportunity to align policy and evidence. While accommodation studies generally yielded positive results, their small sample sizes, descriptive focus, and limited quantity suggest this research is early in its development. We outline potential strategies to advance knowledge on the implementation and effectiveness of communication accommodations in health care settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":49240,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology","volume":"34 3","pages":"1493-1527"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12083755/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJSLP-24-00234","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 protects the civil rights of people with disabilities, including their right to effective communication and equitable health care access through accommodations. The ADA website lists examples of accommodations (e.g., qualified notetaker, hearing amplifiers, cued speech interpreters), but no literature is cited to support this list. Scientific evidence is critical to advancing both the effectiveness and widespread implementation of accommodations. We scoped the literature on interventions supporting equitable communication access (accommodations) for adults with communication disabilities (CDs) in health care settings. We asked what accommodations have been studied, for what CD populations, and how they have been studied.

Method: We used a scoping review approach and conducted searches using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts indexed between January 1, 2003, and August 1, 2024. Data on accommodation type, CD-related health condition, setting, health care workers involved, evidence type, study design, and outcome were collected.

Results: Screening of 1,614 articles identified 58 investigations of 10 communication accommodations in health care settings. The range in number of publications rose from 0-2 to 2-9 over the 11-year period. The three most studied accommodations were customized plan, communication strategies, and augmentative and alternative communication aids (each 21%-22% of studies). Most investigations addressed populations with single CD-related conditions (e.g., aphasia), were descriptive (52%), and had sample sizes ≤ 50 participants. Speech-language pathologists infrequently provided or implemented accommodations (12% of all health care workers involved, by type of worker). Findings were typically positive, but outcome measures were heterogeneous.

Conclusions: The 10 researched accommodations addressed a wider range of CD populations as compared to accommodations found in policy documents, highlighting an opportunity to align policy and evidence. While accommodation studies generally yielded positive results, their small sample sizes, descriptive focus, and limited quantity suggest this research is early in its development. We outline potential strategies to advance knowledge on the implementation and effectiveness of communication accommodations in health care settings.

针对医疗保健中公平沟通机会的残疾住宿证据的范围审查。
目的:1990年《美国残疾人法》保护残疾人的公民权利,包括他们通过便利设施获得有效沟通和公平保健的权利。美国残疾人协会网站列出了便利条件的例子(例如,合格的记录员,听力放大器,提示语音口译员),但没有引用文献来支持这一列表。科学证据对于提高住宿的有效性和广泛实施至关重要。我们对支持卫生保健机构中有沟通障碍(cd)的成人公平交流机会(住宿)的干预措施的文献进行了检索。我们询问研究了哪些住宿,针对哪些乳糜泻人群,以及他们是如何研究的。方法:我们采用范围综述方法,并使用MEDLINE、CINAHL和Embase数据库进行检索。两位审稿人独立筛选了2003年1月1日至2024年8月1日期间索引的摘要和全文。收集了有关住宿类型、cd相关健康状况、环境、涉及的卫生保健工作者、证据类型、研究设计和结果的数据。结果:筛选了1,614篇文章,确定了58项调查,涉及卫生保健机构的10个沟通设施。在11年期间,出版物数量从0-2种增加到2-9种。研究最多的三种住宿是定制计划、沟通策略和辅助和替代沟通辅助(各占研究的21%-22%)。大多数调查针对的是患有单一cd相关疾病(如失语症)的人群,是描述性的(52%),样本量≤50名参与者。语言病理学家很少提供或实施住宿(按工作人员类型,占所有涉及的卫生保健工作者的12%)。结果通常是积极的,但结果测量是不同的。结论:与政策文件中发现的住宿相比,研究的10个住宿解决了更广泛的CD人群,突出了将政策和证据结合起来的机会。虽然住宿研究通常产生了积极的结果,但它们的小样本量、描述性重点和有限的数量表明,这项研究还处于发展的早期阶段。我们概述了潜在的战略,以提高知识的实施和有效性的通信设施在卫生保健设置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
11.50%
发文量
353
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Mission: AJSLP publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles on all aspects of clinical practice in speech-language pathology. The journal is an international outlet for clinical research pertaining to screening, detection, diagnosis, management, and outcomes of communication and swallowing disorders across the lifespan as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. Because of its clinical orientation, the journal disseminates research findings applicable to diverse aspects of clinical practice in speech-language pathology. AJSLP seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of speech-language pathology, including aphasia; apraxia of speech and childhood apraxia of speech; aural rehabilitation; augmentative and alternative communication; cognitive impairment; craniofacial disorders; dysarthria; fluency disorders; language disorders in children; speech sound disorders; swallowing, dysphagia, and feeding disorders; and voice disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信