Communication Outcomes of Children with Hearing Loss: A Comparison of Two Early Intervention Approaches
Aisha Casoojee1, Katijah Khoza-Shangase1, Amisha Kanji1
1Department of Audiology, Faculty of Humanities, School of Human and Community Development, Braamfontein East Campus, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2000, South Africa.
Background:
Early intervention approaches play a critical role in shaping the communication outcomes of children with hearing loss, influencing their language development and overall learning trajectory.
Objectives:
The main objective of this study was to compare the communication outcomes of children with hearing loss who received Listening and Spoken Language-South Africa (LSL-SA) with those who received Traditional Speech-Language Therapy (TSLT).
Methods:
A retrospective record review was conducted to gather data on communication outcomes from participants' speech-language therapy records. Communication outcomes were measured using standardized assessments evaluating speech intelligibility, expressive vocabulary, receptive language, expressive language, audition, and cognitive-linguistic skills. The data were analyzed using quantitative statistics. Key statistical methods included measures to determine associations, identify statistical significance, determine outcomes, and compare differences between the two groups.
Results:
The study found that children in the LSL-SA group had statistically significant better communication outcomes, with 63% achieving age-appropriate speech intelligibility compared to 45% in the TSLT group (p = 0.046). Similar trends were observed for expressive vocabulary (LSL-SA: 58% vs. TSLT: 39%, p = 0.048) and receptive language (LSL-SA: 60% vs. TSLT: 39%, p = 0.043). Additionally, 66% of children in the LSL-SA group were recommended for mainstream schooling, compared to 39% in the TSLT group (p = 0.0023). These findings highlight the importance of early amplification and structured intervention in improving communication outcomes. The results also emphasize the importance of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) in decreasing the odds of delay in communication outcomes, irrespective of the type of communication approach, although a higher proportion of children in the LSL-SA approach group achieved age-appropriate communication outcomes than those in the TSLT group.
Conclusions:
This study highlights that communication intervention approaches aligned with the LSL-SA practice promote better communication development and enhance spoken language outcomes in children with hearing loss, facilitating successful transitions to mainstream schooling. Contribution: This study provides contextually relevant evidence for implementing an LSL-SA intervention approach for children with hearing loss. The implications of these findings for clinical practice and future research are discussed in detail.
