Global searching is not enabled.
Skip to main content

Articulation Disorders (Speech Sound Disorders)

"last update: 29 August 2024"  

- Recommendations

The  following  statements  and  flowchart  were  adapted from the Guidelines of University of North Carolina and Clinical guidance speech therapy which received the highest scores as regards the currency, contents, and quality.

Recommendations statements


 Clinical questions

 Action recommendation

Evidence quality

Strength of recommendation

Study type

References

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Definition


 

 

 

Presentation


Speech sound disorders (SSD) include sound substitutions, omissions, distortions and additions. In addition, there can be errors that affect the word level and/or the rhythm and intonation characteristics of running speech.

Speech sound disorders result from difficulties with speech, motor production and coordination of speech movements, as well as the lack of phonological knowledge or misapplication of the phonological rules associated with the child’s native language. All languages are governed by phonological rules which determine the appropriate speech sounds (or phonemes) and phoneme sequences that characterize a particular language.

 The cause of speech sound disorders in most children is unknown.

The cause of some speech sound problems is known and can be the result of motor speech disorders (e.g., Apraxia and Dysarthria), structural differences (e.g., cleft-palate), syndromes (e.g., Down Syndrome) or sensory deficiencies (e.g., hearing loss).

Low

 





High

 

 

 

 

 

 

High

 Strong recommendation

 

 



Strong recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conditional recommendation

 Cross sectional study

 

 

 


Systematic review

 

 

 

 

 

 

Systematic review

1

  

 

 


  

7

 

 

 

 

 

   

7

 

 

 

 

 

Presentation


Apart from short term memory disorders, the exact cause of speech sound disorders in most children is unknown.

The cause of other articulation disorders is known and can be the result of motor speech disorders (e.g., Apraxia and Dysarthria), structural differences (e.g., cleft-palate), syndromes (e.g., Down Syndrome) or sensory deficiencies (e.g., hearing loss).

SSD have to be clearly differentiated from other organic articulation disorders as early as possible during preliminary diagnosis in order to direct the patient to the suitable diagnostic procedure

 

 

 

 

 

High

 

 

 

 

 

Strong recommendation

 

 

 

 

  

Systematic review

 

 

 

 

  

7


 Clinical questions

 Action recommendation

Evidence quality

 Strength of recommendation

 Study type

 References

Risk factors.


 

 

 

 

 

 

Symptomatology

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assessment


•  Gender-males being higher risk.

•  Ear, nose and throat problems.

•  Family history of speech and language problems.

•  Limited      parental      education/ learning support at home.

•  Omissions/deletions: Specific sounds are omitted or deleted (e.g., boo for book and geen for green).

•  Substitutions: One or more sounds are substituted (e.g., wed for red and dut for duck, widuh for rider).

•  Additions: One or more extra sounds are added into a word (e.g., bulack for black).

•  Distortions: Sounds are modified or    altered    (e.g.,    a    slushy

/s/).

•  Whole-word/syllable-level errors: Weak syllables are deleted (e.g., boon for balloon); a syllable is repeated or deleted (e.g., nana for candy).

•  Prosody errors:   Errors   that occur in stress, rhythm and intonation.

Case history

•  Family history of speech/language difficulties.

•  Recurrent middle ear infections.

•  Child’s primary language used in the home.

•  Family and teacher concerns.

•  Age developmental milestones were met.

•  Medical history.

High

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

High

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Low

Strong recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Strong recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Strong recommendation

 

Systematic review

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Systematic review

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





Cohort study

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clinical questions

 Action recommendation

Evidence quality

Strength of recommendation

Study type

References

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assessment


 Oral mechanism examination includes:

•         Assessment of dentition and alignment of teeth

•         Muscle movement as well as development of the jaw, lips and tongue and the integrity of the oral structures (hard and soft palate, jaw, maxilla, lips and tongue)

• Oral motor reflexes as well as purposeful movement through imitation of non- speech actions

• Diadokokinetic rate: muscle movement for coordination and sequencing

• Assessment of tongue and mouth resting posture to determine existence of tongue thrust

 

low

 

 

 

 

 

 

High

 

Strong recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

strong recommendation

 


Cohort study

 

 

 

 

 


Systematic review

 

8

 

 

 

 



9

 

 Clinical questions

 Action recommendation

 Evidence quality

Strength of recommendation

Study type

References

Assessment

Audiological assessment




Speech Sound Assessment


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Assessment

Stimulability


Will be provided to children during the initial Speech and Language Evaluation unless results of a comprehensive audiological assessment has already been completed. Follow up audiological assessment is indicated when progress in speech development has not been achieved or is mini- mal and evidence suggests risk for hearing im- pairment.

The evaluation process may include the selec- tion of administration of standardized tests, lan- guage/speech samples, or a descriptive analysis of informal findings.

Assess articulation at the word, phrase and con- versational levels.

Establish a phonetic inventory for the child (i.e., what sounds can the child produce?).

Identify the error patterns the child uses and look for phonological process use in children who are less intelligible.

Identify speech sound production inconsisten- cies. The child does not always misarticulate the error sound the same way in all words.

Evaluate stimulability of error sounds.

Evaluate intelligibility.

Child’s ability to produce target sounds with cues

•         Used to select treatment targets based on the child’s ability to utilize these cues

•         Assists in determining prognosis.

High

 

 

 

 

 

  

Low

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

low

Strong recommendation

 

 

 

 

   

Strong recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Strong recommendation

 

Systematic review

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cohort study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   Cohort study

10

 

 

 

 

 

   

8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 







 

8


Clinical questions

 Action recommendation

Evidence quality

Strength of recommendation

Study type

References

Intelligibility


Intelligibility refers to the listener’s ability to understand the child’s speech.

A guideline for expected conversational intelligibility levels of typically developing children talking to unfamiliar listeners is summarized below

•         1 year- 25% intelligible

•         2 year- 50% intelligible

•       3 year- 75% intelligible

•         4 year- 100% intelligible Intelligibility can be impacted by

several factors including:

•         Length of utterance

•       Familiarity with child’s speech.

•       Child’s speech rate, intonation, loudness level, vocal quality and fluency

•       Contextual cues

•       Presence of ambient noise during conversation.

Low

Strong recommendation

 

Comparative study

11

Onset of intervention


If SSD is not attributed to any other communication disorder, intervention should be started at the age of 5-6 years.

Therapy should be postponed to give chance for completing the phonemic inventory and disappearance of all phonological processes including devoicing

low

Conditional recommendation

 

Cohort study

12

Intervention

Contextual utilization


 

 

  

 Contrast therapy


Treatment starts with practicing syllable based contexts in which the sound is produced correctly. That syllable is used to train more difficult productions. For example, a /s/ may be more easily produced in the syllable with a high front vowel.

Targets focus on a specific phoneme feature using contrasting word pairs. Minimal pairs are different by one feature or phoneme that changes the word meaning (tip vs. ship). Maximal pairs use a sound target differing by several distinctive features which affect phoneme placement and manner to introduce sounds that the child cannot produce ( beat vs. cheat)

Low

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

High

Conditional recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

 

Strong recommendation

 

Cohort study

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Systematic review

 

 

13

 

 

 

 

 

14


 Clinical questions

 Action recommendation

Evidence quality

Strength of recommendation

Study type

References

Core vocabulary approach


 

 

 

 

 

Cycles approach


 






Distinctive features approach


Used with children who are highly unintelligible due to inconsistent misarticulations and may not respond well to traditional therapy. This is a word-based approach as opposed to a phoneme-based technique. Words the child commonly uses are selected for practice and feedback is provided to reinforce the most accurate production of each word.

Focuses on improving phonological patterns with a strategy similar to normal sound acquisition. It is used with children who have poor intelligibility, characterized by numerous omissions and limited phonemic inventories. Each cycle targets all phonological patterns in error until they emerge in spontaneous speech.

 

 

Focuses on sound features the child cannot produce (nasals, fricative, voicing, placement) and is usually used with children who substitute.

sounds. Error patterns are targeted using tasks such as minimal pair contrasts; usually once a contrast pattern emerges, it can be generalized.

to other sounds that share the same feature.

low

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

High

 

 

 

 



High

Conditional recommandation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conditional recommandation

 

 

 



Strong recommendation

 

 Case study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Systematic review

 

 

  



Systematic review

15

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

16

 

 

 


 


14

  

Clinical question

 Action recommendation

Evidence quality

Strength of recommendation

Study type

References

Metaphone therapy


 

 

 

 

 

 Naturalistic Speech Intelligibility Intervention


 

 

 Speech sound Perception Training


Used with children who appear to have not mastered phonological system rules. Examples are descriptive and provide information about how a sound is produced, e.g., voiced (noisy) vs. voiceless (quiet). Sounds most impacting intelligibility are selected first.

Uses everyday activities to   elicit the target sound frequently during the session. For example, the child is asked about a toy that involves responses using the targeted sound. (i.e., “What color is the car?” “Red.”) Appropriate productions are recast (i.e., casually modeled by the clinician or parent).

Speech perception tasks are used to help the child gain a consistent perception of the target sound. Tasks may include auditory bombardment and sound identification tasks. Usually used prior to or at the same time as speech production intervention.

Low

 

 

 

 

 

 



   Low

 

 

 

 

 High

Conditional recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

 


Strong recommendation

 

 

 

      Strong recommendation

 Cohort study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cohort study

 

 

 

 

 Systematic review

17

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 18

 

 

 

 14