Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Literature Analysis on PROMPT Treatment (1984-2020)

프롬프트(PROMPT) 치료기법에 관한 문헌 분석(1984-2020년)

  • Kim, Wha-soo (Department of speech language pathology, Daegu University) ;
  • Lee, Rio (Department of speech language pathology, Daegu University) ;
  • Lee, Ji-woo (Department of Music and Culture, Dong-A University)
  • 김화수 (대구대학교 언어치료학과) ;
  • 이리우 (대구대학교 언어치료전공) ;
  • 이지우 (동아대학교 음악문화학과)
  • Received : 2020.11.30
  • Accepted : 2021.02.20
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzed 28 domestic and foreign studies related Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets treatment techniques from 1984 to 2020 to prepare basic data for the development of PROMPT intervention programs and examination tools. According to the analysis, continuous research has been conducted since 1984 when the prompt study was first started, and the method of research was 16 intervention studies, with the highest number of speech disorders, and the target age being 3 to 5 years old, the most frequently conducted for infancy. The treatment was the most frequent in the 16th sessions, and the activities were based on the Motor Speech Hierarchy(MSH), except for the subjects of the non-verbal autism spectrum disorder. According to the analysis of the dependent variables, 'speech production' was the most common, followed by 'speech motor control', 'articulation', and 'speech intelligibility' were highest. Combined with all these studies, it suggests that PROMPT, which are directly useful for exercise spoken word production, are effectively being used outside the country and that it is necessary to develop a PROMPT program that can be applied domestically, in Korea.

본 연구는 1984년부터 2020년까지 국내·외 프롬프트(Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets, PROMPT) 관련 연구를 분석하여 우리말에 적합한 프롬프트 프로그램 개발에 필요한 기초자료를 마련하고자 한다. 연구 대상은 1984년부터 2020년까지의 프롬프트 치료기법과 관련된 국외 연구 27편과 국내 연구 1편을 분석하였다. 분석한 결과, 프롬프트 연구가 처음 시작된 1984년부터 지속적으로 연구가 이루어지고 있으며, 연구방법은 중재연구가 16편으로, 말소리장애가 가장 많았으며 대상 연령은 3-5세로 유아기를 대상으로 가장 많이 실시되었다. 중재프로그램은 16회기가 가장 많았으며, 중재프로그램 활동은 무발화 자폐스펙트럼장애 대상을 제외하고 운동구어계층(Motor Speech Hierarchy, MSH)을 토대로 이루어졌다. 종속변인을 분석한 결과, '구어산출'이 가장 많았으며, '말 운동제어', '조음', '구어명료도' 순으로 높게 나타났다. 지금까지의 연구를 종합해보면 국외에서는 구어산출에 직접적인 도움을 주는 운동 구어 치료법인 프롬프트가 효과적으로 쓰이고 있다. 그러나 국내에서는 현재까지 우리말에 알맞은 프롬프트 프로그램 개발 및 연구가 부족한 실정이다. 그러므로 본 연구를 통해서 국내 말·언어장애 아동에게 프롬프트를 적용하여 구어산출 및 조음에 도움을 줄 수 있는 우리말 프롬프트 프로그램 개발이 필요하다는 것을 시사한다고 볼 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. E. Ko, (2018). Educating Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children : Hakjisa
  2. J. A. Bauman-Waengler, (2000) Articulatory and phonological impairments: a clinical focus. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
  3. K. H Kang. (2000). Improvement of alveolar sound production through speech therapy. Master thesis. Dankook University. Yongin.
  4. A. Bose, P. Square, R. Schlosser. & P. Lieshout. (2001). Effects of PROMPT therapy on speech motor function in a person with aphasia and apraxia of speech. Aphasiology, 15(8), 767-785. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687040143000186
  5. S. Rogers, D. Hayden, S. Hepburn, R. Charlifue-Smith, T. Hall. & A .Hayes. (2006). Teaching young nonverbal children with autism useful speech: A pilot study of the Denver Model and PROMPT interventions. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(8),1007-1024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0142-x
  6. D. Hayden, & I Stockman. (2004). PROMPT: A tactually grounded treatment approach to speech production disorders. Movement and action in learning and development: Clinical implications for pervasive developmental disorders, 255-297
  7. Z. Zhian, (2017). Tracking Visible Features of Speech for Computer-Based Speech Therapy for Childhood Apraxia of Speech. Master thesis. York University. Toronto.
  8. V. Yu, D. Kadis, A. Oh, D. Goshulak., A. Namasivayam, M. Pukonen. & E. Pang. (2014). Changes in voice onset time and motor speech measures in children with motor speech disorders after PROMPT therapy. Clinical Linguistic and Phonetics, 28(6), 396-412. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2013.874040
  9. G. T. Baranek. (2002). Efficacy of sensory and motor interventions for children with autism. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 32(5), 397-422. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020541906063
  10. D. Hayden. (2006). The PROMPT model: Use and application for children with mixed phonological-motor impairment. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 8(3), 265-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/14417040600861094
  11. D. Hayden, & P. Square. (1994). Motor speech treatment hierarchy: A systems approach. Clinics in Communication Disorders, 4(3), 162-174.
  12. D. Hayden, & P. Square. (1999). VMPAC: Verbal motor production assessment for children. San Antonio; The Psychological Corporation.
  13. V. Yu, D. Kadis, D. Goshulak, A. Namasivayam, M. Pukonen, R. Kroll, L. Nil. & E. Pang, (2018) Impact of Motor Speech Intervention on Neural Activity in Children with Speech Sound Disorders: Use of Magnetoencephalography. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 8, 415-429. https://doi.org/10.4236/jbbs.2018.87026
  14. R. Ward, S. Leitao. & G. Strauss. (2014). An evaluation of the effectiveness of PROMPT therapy in improving speech production accuracy in six children with cerebral palsy. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16(4), 355-371. https://doi.org/10.3109/17549507.2013.876662
  15. M. Grigos, D. Hayden, & J. Eigen, (2010). Perceptual and articulatory changes in speech production following PROMPT treatment. Journal of Medical Speech Pathology, 18(4), 46-53.
  16. D. Kadis, D. Goshulak, A. Namasivayam, M. Pukonen, R. Kroll, L. Nil. & J. Lerch, (2014). Cortical thickness in children receiving intensive therapy for idiopathic apraxia of speech. Brain Topography, 27(2), 240-247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-013-0308-8
  17. R. Mercado, K. Simpson. & K. Bellom-Rohrbacher. (2019). Effect of Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets (PROMPT) on Compensatory Articulation in Children With Cleft Palate/Lip. Global Pediatric Health.
  18. R. O. Lee (2019). The Influence of Communication Mediation Program Using the In this study, communication mediation using the PROMPT. Master thesis. Daegu University. Daegu.
  19. L. Shriberg. (2002). Classification and misclassification of child speech sound disorders. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Speech Language and Hearing Association. Atlanta, GA: Nov.
  20. P. McCauley. & E. Strand, (2008). A review of standardized tests of nonverbal oral and speech motor performance in children. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 181-91.
  21. J. Gierut. (1998). Treatment efficacy: functional phonological disorders in children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 42, 85-100.
  22. R. Waring. & R. Knight. (2013). How should children with speech sound disorders be classified? A review and critical evaluation of current classification systems. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. 48, 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2012.00195.x
  23. A. Namasivayam, M. Pukonen, D. Goshulak, V. Yu,, D. Kadis, R. Kroll. & L. Nil. (2013). Changes in speech intelligibility following motor speech treatment in children. Journal of Communication Disorders, 46(3), 264-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2013.02.003
  24. M. J. Shin et al. (2018). Speech Mechanism Screening Test for Children : An Evaluation of Performance in 3- to 12-Year-Old Normal Developing Children. Communication Sciences and Disorders. 23(1).180-197. https://doi.org/10.12963/csd.17451
  25. E. T. Kim et al (2018). Validity and reliability analyses for the development of urimal test of articulation and phonology-2. Communication Sciences and Disorders. 23(4). 959-970. https://doi.org/10.12963/csd.18545