Comparing Traditional Motor Speech Practice to Contextualized Speech Practice in Preschoolers With Childhood Apraxia of Speech

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare retention of real-word targets across practice conditions (contextualized vs. motor-only) within a modified integral stimulation treatment for preschoolers with childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). Method: A single-subject experimental design with alternating treatments was used with matched target sets randomly assigned to contextualized practice, motor-only practice, or no treatment. Three preschoolers with CAS completed 18 therapy sessions, each consisting of two 25-min blocks: one contextualized practice and one motor-only practice. Order of practice was randomized each visit. Changes in percent phonemes correct (PPC) and lexical stress accuracy, derived from blinded transcription, were explored with visual analysis and effect sizes (standardized mean difference, d statistic). Results: Meaningful improvements ( d > 1) were observed in PPC across words treated in contextualized practice for all three children immediately posttreatment and for two of three children at the 1-month follow-up. Meaningful improvements in the motor-only condition were observed in two of three children immediately posttreatment and at follow-up. No meaningful changes were observed in lexical stress across any conditions in any participant. Conclusions: This study provides preliminary support for the feasibility of a modified integral stimulation therapy that incorporates elements of linguistically grounded therapies (linguistic retrieval, recasts, expansions) that may facilitate target retention in some preschoolers with CAS. However, other elements should be explored in conjunction with integral stimulation to maximize clinical outcomes. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.33228981