Augmentative and Alternative Communication – Scoping Review / Unterstützte Kommunikation – Scoping Review

A. Kollmar, C. Hohenstein, Adriana Sabatino, B. Gantschnig
{"title":"Augmentative and Alternative Communication – Scoping Review / Unterstützte Kommunikation – Scoping Review","authors":"A. Kollmar, C. Hohenstein, Adriana Sabatino, B. Gantschnig","doi":"10.2478/ijhp-2018-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction The effective use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication is challenging, not only for persons with complex communication needs, but also for their significant others. There is a need, therefore, for interprofessional collaboration in order to effectively assess, provide, and evaluate services. Aim The aim of this scoping review was to summarize current evidence in the field of Augmentative and Alternative Communication and reveal the demands for further research. Method We searched in the electronic databases Pubmed, AMED, and CINAHL using following keywords child*, disability, cerebral palsy, augmentative and alternative communication, intervention, and therapy to identify relevant literature. We summarised the content of the included studies. Results We included 16 literature reviews and 36 studies in this review. The 36 studies included 11 intervention studies, 20 descriptive studies, two experimental studies, and three studies evaluating assessments. Most of the studies were focussing on children with cerebral palsy and autism in the contexts of home, hospital, and primary school. There were no intervention studies, focusing on secondary and/or tertiary level of education or work. Moreover, we have not found any evidence from German speaking Europe. Conclusion In order to support the use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication and to enable participation of persons with complex communication needs, various endeavours are needed: in the practice of care settings interprofessional collaboration is required. Further research is needed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, focussing on youth and the contexts of secondary and/or tertiary education or work, or on assessments.","PeriodicalId":91706,"journal":{"name":"International journal of health professions","volume":"17 1","pages":"108 - 91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of health professions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/ijhp-2018-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The effective use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication is challenging, not only for persons with complex communication needs, but also for their significant others. There is a need, therefore, for interprofessional collaboration in order to effectively assess, provide, and evaluate services. Aim The aim of this scoping review was to summarize current evidence in the field of Augmentative and Alternative Communication and reveal the demands for further research. Method We searched in the electronic databases Pubmed, AMED, and CINAHL using following keywords child*, disability, cerebral palsy, augmentative and alternative communication, intervention, and therapy to identify relevant literature. We summarised the content of the included studies. Results We included 16 literature reviews and 36 studies in this review. The 36 studies included 11 intervention studies, 20 descriptive studies, two experimental studies, and three studies evaluating assessments. Most of the studies were focussing on children with cerebral palsy and autism in the contexts of home, hospital, and primary school. There were no intervention studies, focusing on secondary and/or tertiary level of education or work. Moreover, we have not found any evidence from German speaking Europe. Conclusion In order to support the use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication and to enable participation of persons with complex communication needs, various endeavours are needed: in the practice of care settings interprofessional collaboration is required. Further research is needed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, focussing on youth and the contexts of secondary and/or tertiary education or work, or on assessments.
补充和替代通信-范围审查/外部通信-范围审查
摘要:有效地使用辅助和替代沟通是一个挑战,不仅对有复杂沟通需求的人,而且对他们的重要他人也是如此。因此,为了有效地评估、提供和评价服务,有必要进行跨专业合作。目的本综述的目的是总结目前在辅助和替代交际领域的证据,并揭示进一步研究的需求。方法以child*、残疾、脑瘫、辅助和替代交流、干预和治疗为关键词,在Pubmed、AMED和CINAHL电子数据库中检索相关文献。我们总结了纳入研究的内容。结果本综述纳入16篇文献综述和36项研究。这36项研究包括11项干预研究、20项描述性研究、2项实验性研究和3项评估性研究。大多数研究都集中在家庭、医院和小学背景下的脑瘫和自闭症儿童身上。没有针对中等和/或高等教育或工作水平的干预研究。此外,我们没有在讲德语的欧洲找到任何证据。为了支持辅助和替代沟通的使用,并使有复杂沟通需求的人能够参与,需要做出各种努力:在护理环境的实践中需要跨专业合作。为了评价干预措施的有效性,需要进一步的研究,重点放在青年和中等和(或)高等教育或工作的情况,或评估方面。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信