JCPSLP Vol 17 No 3 2015

60 / 64

Fresh science and pioneering practice
170 JCPSLP Volume 17, Number 3 2015 Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology
Around the journals
Hoff, E., & Core, C. (2015). What clinicians need to
know about bilingual development. Seminars in
Speech and Language, 36(2), 89–99.
Jess Young
This article is one in a special edition on language
impairment in bilingual children. This excellent discussion
paper summarises the key evidence for nine
recommendations for clinical practice with bilingual children.
The nine conclusions (including some myth busters)
summarised are that: 1) speaking two or more languages
does not confuse children; 2) two languages can be learned
simultaneously, and need not be separated; 3) it takes
longer for a child to become proficient in two languages in
comparison with learning only one; 4) language dominance
is not the same as having only one language; 5) the best
way to determine a bilingual child’s language learning
capacity is to measure total vocabulary in both languages;
6) children’s strengths in each language will vary; 7) as for
monolingual children, the quality and quantity of input will
influence language learning; 8) families should be
encouraged to retain their home languages; and 9) there is
great heterogeneity in bilingual language environments, thus
bilingual children’s language skills will also vary widely. A
great read for all paediatric clinicians in our increasingly
linguistically diverse nation!
What’s new in aphasia?
Joanne Murray
Have you seen the new Australian Aphasia Rehabilitation
Pathway (AARP) yet? It is a set of care standards designed
for speech pathologists that aims to guide person-centred,
evidence-based rehabilitation for people with aphasia. It
was developed through national collaboration of speech
pathology clinicians, researchers and people with aphasia
and was launched in October 2014 at the Aphasiology
Symposium of Australia. It consists of 82 best practice
standards divided into eight core areas that cover the full
spectrum of the rehabilitation journey for a person with
aphasia from referral, through assessment, intervention,
and enhancing the communicative environment. Each best
practice standard is supported by a summary of the
relevant scientific evidence, resources, and original
references so it becomes almost a one-stop shop for
current, relevant, evidence-based management ideas. The
AARP fits nicely within the International Classification of
Functioning, Disability, and health (ICF) framework and
addresses assessment and management of aphasia from
an impairment perspective and via the social approach. It is
therefore relevant for speech pathologists working across
all health care settings from acute to community. The
ultimate aim of the pathway is to improve the quality of
patient management and optimise outcomes for our clients
with aphasia, so take a look today at http://www.
Doeltgen, S.H., Bradnam, L.V., Young, J.A., & Fong, E. (2015).
Transcranial non-invasive brain stimulation in
swallowing rehabilitation following stroke – A review
of the literature. Physiology and Behavior, 143, 1–9.
Chris Brebner
This is an excellent article which summarises the evidence
for the relatively new area of non-invasive brain stimulation,
a technique being used in swallowing rehabilitation. This
article provides a descriptive review of the literature outlining
the evidence that underpins this innovative technique in
swallowing rehabilitation following stroke. Seventeen
studies meeting the inclusion criteria were reviewed to
explore the evidence. Particular consideration was given to
the studies’ participant samples, cortical representations
that had been targeted by the brain stimulation, and the
measures used to evaluate the outcomes. These studies
show that non-invasive brain stimulation may be a useful
additional technique to support post-stroke swallowing
rehabilitation. In addition to summarising the key evidence
in this area, the authors discuss the limitations of the
current evidence, in particular the relative infancy of this
area, the small participant sample sizes, and differences in
the design of the studies designs that have been
conducted. This paper also summarises the clinical
implications of this research. A must-read for those working
in swallowing rehabilitation following stroke.
Falkus, G., Tilley, C., Thomas, C., Hockey, H., Kennedy, A.,
Arnold, T., … Earney, R. (2015). Assessing the
effectiveness of parent–child interaction therapy
with language delayed children: A clinical
investigation. Child Language Teaching and Therapy,
early online 1–11.
Tara Shem
Interventions that focus on the interactions between parents
and their children are widely used by speech pathologists
around the world. This article aims to address the lack of
evidence, other than clinician report, on the effectiveness of
such approaches. Eighteen parent–child dyads where the
child was aged between 1;09 and 3;06 at initial referral
participated in the UK-based study. Blind assessments pre
and post intervention were conducted. The intervention
used was a parent–child therapy regularly implemented for
children in the clinical setting upon receiving an initial
diagnosis of language delay. Results showed that after
intervention, the children’s mean length of utterance had
increased, as had the proportion of child to parent speech.
Additionally, there were significant changes in the ratings
given in the parent rating scale. The authors state that their
results show that there are benefits of an intervention that
targets working with parents and children on their
interactions. However, they acknowledge that further
research is needed to determine whether these effects are
maintained over time and whether there are benefits seen in
the children’s communication skills.