Outcome measures in Australian speech-language pathology health settings: An exploration of speech-language pathologists' perspectives and experiences.
Tracks
7
Professional practice
Professional standards
Research
| Friday, June 13, 2025 |
| 2:45 PM - 2:55 PM |
| Knowledge Hub | Halls MNO, Ground Level |
Overview
Georgia Bogdanovski
Details
⏫ Rapid impact
⏲️ 2.45pm - 2.55pm
⌛ 10-minutes
📚 Assumed knowledge of attendees: Intermediate (Some previous learning/working knowledge of topic e.g. treated a few cases)
⏲️ 2.45pm - 2.55pm
⌛ 10-minutes
📚 Assumed knowledge of attendees: Intermediate (Some previous learning/working knowledge of topic e.g. treated a few cases)
Presenter
Georgia Bogdanovski
Outcome measures in Australian speech-language pathology health settings: An exploration of speech-language pathologists' perspectives and experiences.
2:45 PM - 2:55 PMPresentation summary
In this presentation, the use of outcome measures by speech-language pathologists are explored across Australian health settings. The objective is to provide a concise overview of our research, focusing on the aims, methods, results, and conclusions.
Our aims address the factors shaping outcome measure use through speech-language pathologists' perspectives and experiences across Australian health settings. These factors support determining the motivators, barriers, and facilitators across service, clinician, and patient-levels with consideration of the evidence-based framework E4BP. A cross-sectional descriptive study was undertaken using an online 60-item survey to gather quantitative and qualitative data.
Our methods involved descriptive statistics to analyse quantitative data and inductive content analysis for qualitative data. These analysis methods enabled us to determine the extent to which speech-language pathologists' perceived factors shape outcome measure use across Australian health settings and how.
The results of our study reveal most participants prioritised the use of informal impairment-based outcome measures. Four generic categories characterised participant responses: (1) utility of outcome measures, (2) patient-centred care, (3) context-specific factors, and (4) speech-language pathologist factors. Notably, time constraints were a primary barrier that impeded on outcome measure use for speech-language pathologists who have professionally practised for one to five years across acute, subacute, and outpatient settings.
In conclusion, outcome measures are generally valued but not always utilised by speech-language pathologists in Australian health settings with a prominent factor being time. Future research should explore outcome measure use by speech-language pathologists based on the ICF and E4BP frameworks beyond health setting contexts and investigate how a multidisciplinary team approach may support completion of outcome measures by speech-language pathologists.
Our aims address the factors shaping outcome measure use through speech-language pathologists' perspectives and experiences across Australian health settings. These factors support determining the motivators, barriers, and facilitators across service, clinician, and patient-levels with consideration of the evidence-based framework E4BP. A cross-sectional descriptive study was undertaken using an online 60-item survey to gather quantitative and qualitative data.
Our methods involved descriptive statistics to analyse quantitative data and inductive content analysis for qualitative data. These analysis methods enabled us to determine the extent to which speech-language pathologists' perceived factors shape outcome measure use across Australian health settings and how.
The results of our study reveal most participants prioritised the use of informal impairment-based outcome measures. Four generic categories characterised participant responses: (1) utility of outcome measures, (2) patient-centred care, (3) context-specific factors, and (4) speech-language pathologist factors. Notably, time constraints were a primary barrier that impeded on outcome measure use for speech-language pathologists who have professionally practised for one to five years across acute, subacute, and outpatient settings.
In conclusion, outcome measures are generally valued but not always utilised by speech-language pathologists in Australian health settings with a prominent factor being time. Future research should explore outcome measure use by speech-language pathologists based on the ICF and E4BP frameworks beyond health setting contexts and investigate how a multidisciplinary team approach may support completion of outcome measures by speech-language pathologists.
Refrences
Aggarwal, R., & Ranganathan, P. (2019). Study designs: Part 2 – descriptive studies. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 10(1), 34-36. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_154_18
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (n.d.). National outcomes measurement system (NOMS). https://www.asha.org/noms/#:~:text=ASHA's%20National%20Outcomes%20Measurement%20System,the%20quality%20of%20those%20services
Aphasia Institute. (n.d.). Welcome to CAMS: Helping you measure communicative accessibility. CAMS: Communicative access measures for stroke. https://cams.aphasia.ca/?fbclid=IwAR1OvYOyHZdFJpK-2Gp-LJzTfvUrKOGa1c6BsKNGkGYK7SlbX5EZGy-FD4
Arnold, H., Wallace, S. J., Ryan, B., Finch, E., & Shrubsole, K. (2020). Current practice and barriers and facilitators to outcome measurement in aphasia rehabilitation: A cross-sectional study using the theoretical domains framework. Aphasiology, 31(1), 47-69.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1678090
Conway, A. & Walshe, M. (2015). Management of non-progressive dysarthria: Practice patterns of speech and language therapists in the Republic of Ireland. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 50(3), 374-388.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12143
Deary, I. J., Wilson, J. A., Carding, P. N., & MacKenzie, K. (2003). VoiSS: A patient-derived Voice Symptom Scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 54(5), 483-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3999(02)00469-5
Dodd, B., Hua, Z., Crosbie, S., Holm, A., & Ozanne, A. (2002). Diagnostic evaluation of articulation and phonology. Pearson
Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
Finch, E., Ivanek, M., & Wenke, R. (2022). The who, why, when, where, what and how of using outcome measures in dysarthria: A qualitative exploration of speech-language pathologists’ perspectives. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 24(1), 12-21.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2021.1924859
Kagan, A., Simmons-Mackie, N., Victor, J. C., & Chan, M. T. (2017). Communicative access measures for stroke: Development and evaluation of a quality improvement tool. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 98(11), 2228-2236.e5.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2017.04.017
Kiresuk, T. J., & Sherman, R. E. (1968). Goal attainment scaling: A general method for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs. Community Mental Health Journal, 4(6), 443-453. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01530764
Law, M. C., Baptiste, S., Carswell, A., McColl, M. A., Polatajko, H. J., & Pollock, N. (2014). Canadian occupational performance measure (5th ed.). CAOT Publications ACE.
Liamputtong, P. (2022). Research methods and evidence-based practice (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Pearce, C. (2009). Electronic medical records – where to from here? Australian Family Physician, 38(7), 537-539. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.250601498255687
Perry, A., & Skeat, J. (2013). AusTOMs for Speech Pathology (2nd ed.). La Trobe University.
Rapolthy-Beck, A., Fleming, J., & Turpin, M. (2022). Occupational therapy service provision in adult intensive care units in Australia: A survey of workload practices, interventions and barriers. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 69, 316-330.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12794
Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (n.d.). Outcome measurement – overview. https://www.rcslt.org/speech-and-language-therapy/guidance-for-delivering-slt-services/outcome-measurement/
Rumbach, A. F., Finch, E., & Stevenson, G. (2019). What are the usual assessment practices in adult non-progressive dysarthria rehabilitation? A survey of Australian dysarthria practice patterns. Journal of Communication Disorders, 79, 46-57.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comdis.2019.03.002
Swinburn, K., Porter, G., & Howard, D. (2004). Comprehensive aphasia test (CAT). Psychology Press.
Thomas-Stonell, N. L., Oddson, B., Robertson, B., & Rosenbaum, P. L. (2010). Development of the FOCUS (Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six), a communication outcome measure for preschool children. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 52(1),
47-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03410.x
Turnbull, H., Dark, L., Skinner, I., & Hemsley, B. (2020). The readers, the writers and the documents: A scoping review of the information accessibility and health literacy demands of allied health reports. Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology, 22(2), 85-94.
Walshe, M., Peach, R. K., & Miller, N. (2009). Dysarthria impact profile: Development of a scale to measure psychosocial effects. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 44(5), 693-715. https://doi.org/10.1080/13682820802317536
Worrall, L., & Egan, J. (2001). A survey of outcome measures used by Australian speech pathologists. Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing, 6(3), 149-162. https://doi.org/10.1179/136132801805576635
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (n.d.). National outcomes measurement system (NOMS). https://www.asha.org/noms/#:~:text=ASHA's%20National%20Outcomes%20Measurement%20System,the%20quality%20of%20those%20services
Aphasia Institute. (n.d.). Welcome to CAMS: Helping you measure communicative accessibility. CAMS: Communicative access measures for stroke. https://cams.aphasia.ca/?fbclid=IwAR1OvYOyHZdFJpK-2Gp-LJzTfvUrKOGa1c6BsKNGkGYK7SlbX5EZGy-FD4
Arnold, H., Wallace, S. J., Ryan, B., Finch, E., & Shrubsole, K. (2020). Current practice and barriers and facilitators to outcome measurement in aphasia rehabilitation: A cross-sectional study using the theoretical domains framework. Aphasiology, 31(1), 47-69.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1678090
Conway, A. & Walshe, M. (2015). Management of non-progressive dysarthria: Practice patterns of speech and language therapists in the Republic of Ireland. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 50(3), 374-388.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12143
Deary, I. J., Wilson, J. A., Carding, P. N., & MacKenzie, K. (2003). VoiSS: A patient-derived Voice Symptom Scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 54(5), 483-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3999(02)00469-5
Dodd, B., Hua, Z., Crosbie, S., Holm, A., & Ozanne, A. (2002). Diagnostic evaluation of articulation and phonology. Pearson
Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
Finch, E., Ivanek, M., & Wenke, R. (2022). The who, why, when, where, what and how of using outcome measures in dysarthria: A qualitative exploration of speech-language pathologists’ perspectives. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 24(1), 12-21.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2021.1924859
Kagan, A., Simmons-Mackie, N., Victor, J. C., & Chan, M. T. (2017). Communicative access measures for stroke: Development and evaluation of a quality improvement tool. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 98(11), 2228-2236.e5.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2017.04.017
Kiresuk, T. J., & Sherman, R. E. (1968). Goal attainment scaling: A general method for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs. Community Mental Health Journal, 4(6), 443-453. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01530764
Law, M. C., Baptiste, S., Carswell, A., McColl, M. A., Polatajko, H. J., & Pollock, N. (2014). Canadian occupational performance measure (5th ed.). CAOT Publications ACE.
Liamputtong, P. (2022). Research methods and evidence-based practice (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Pearce, C. (2009). Electronic medical records – where to from here? Australian Family Physician, 38(7), 537-539. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.250601498255687
Perry, A., & Skeat, J. (2013). AusTOMs for Speech Pathology (2nd ed.). La Trobe University.
Rapolthy-Beck, A., Fleming, J., & Turpin, M. (2022). Occupational therapy service provision in adult intensive care units in Australia: A survey of workload practices, interventions and barriers. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 69, 316-330.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12794
Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (n.d.). Outcome measurement – overview. https://www.rcslt.org/speech-and-language-therapy/guidance-for-delivering-slt-services/outcome-measurement/
Rumbach, A. F., Finch, E., & Stevenson, G. (2019). What are the usual assessment practices in adult non-progressive dysarthria rehabilitation? A survey of Australian dysarthria practice patterns. Journal of Communication Disorders, 79, 46-57.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comdis.2019.03.002
Swinburn, K., Porter, G., & Howard, D. (2004). Comprehensive aphasia test (CAT). Psychology Press.
Thomas-Stonell, N. L., Oddson, B., Robertson, B., & Rosenbaum, P. L. (2010). Development of the FOCUS (Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six), a communication outcome measure for preschool children. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 52(1),
47-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03410.x
Turnbull, H., Dark, L., Skinner, I., & Hemsley, B. (2020). The readers, the writers and the documents: A scoping review of the information accessibility and health literacy demands of allied health reports. Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology, 22(2), 85-94.
Walshe, M., Peach, R. K., & Miller, N. (2009). Dysarthria impact profile: Development of a scale to measure psychosocial effects. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 44(5), 693-715. https://doi.org/10.1080/13682820802317536
Worrall, L., & Egan, J. (2001). A survey of outcome measures used by Australian speech pathologists. Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing, 6(3), 149-162. https://doi.org/10.1179/136132801805576635
**********
Georgia Bogdanovski is an early career speech pathologist who graduated with a Bachelor of Speech Pathology (Honours) in 2023. After completing her Honours research, she has developed a keen interest to continue contributing to research and becoming a preliminary researcher. Georgia has clinical experience working with adults in inpatient hospital and private disability settings, particularly working with people with acute and neurological/neurodegenerative presentations.
The information contained in this program is current at of the time of publishing but is subject to changes made without notice.
Disclaimer: © (2024) The Speech Pathology Association of Australia Limited. All rights reserved.
Important Notice, please read: The views expressed in this presentation and reproduced in these materials are not necessarily the views of, or endorsed by, The Speech Pathology Association of Australia Limited ("the Association"). The Association makes no warranty or representation in relation to the content, currency or accuracy of any of the materials comprised in this presentation. The Association expressly disclaims any and all liability (including liability for negligence) in respect of use of these materials and the information contained within them. The Association recommends you seek independent professional advice prior to making any decision involving matters outlined in this presentation including in any of the materials referred to or otherwise incorporated into this presentation.
.
