Abstract

Question 1

RCT?

Answer 1

Randomised controlled trial = satunnaistettu, vertaistettu koe

Question 2

How many are diagnosted with PD in worldwide?

Answer 2

More than 6 milj.

Question 3

How many prosent develop speech signs?

Answer 3

Almost 90%

Question 4

Is this first time for RCT?

Answer 4

the critical question of whether speech is more intelligible after treatment has not been investigated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT)

Question 5

Hypothesised?

Answer 5

that intensive speech treatment would improve speech intelligibility in PD

Question 6

Baseline?

Answer 6

Pre-treatment

Question 7

How many patient participated?

Answer 7

Sixty-four patients with hypokinetic dysarthria (puhemotorinen häiriö) secondary to PD participated in this single-centre, parallel arm, statistically-powered RCT.

Question 8

What does reporting follow?

Answer 8

Reporting follows CONSORT guidelines for non-pharmacological treatment.

Question 9

How was patients selected?

Answer 9

Patients were recruited from US clinics

Question 10

What were the groups?

Answer 10

3 groups; (16 1-hour sessions/1 month) targeting voice (voice group) or
targeting articulation (articulation group)
or to an untreated group (no treatment group)

Question 11

How was the trial performed?

Answer 11

Speech treatments were delivered by speech clinicians who specialised in treating patients with PD. Trial design minimised bias and supported equipoise=tasapaino/vastapaino/balanssi.
For intelligibility assessment, blinded listeners (n = 117) orthographically transcribed 57 patients’ recorded, self-generated narrative speech samples, randomly presented in multi-talker babble noise.

blinded listeners transcribed baseline and post-treatment speech samples for intelligibility assessment of 57 patients in the voice (n = 19), articulation (n = 19) and no treatment (n = 19) groups

Question 12

Who were listeners?

Answer 12

Listeners were American-English speakers, ages 1835 years, with normal hearing

Question 13

What was recognised the most objective measure of intelligibility?

Answer 13

The primary outcome was baseline (pre-treatment) to post-treatment change in transcription accuracy (TA), recog- nised as the most objective measure of intelligibility.
So TA = transcription accuracy

Question 14

Howv was TA defined?

Answer 14

TA was defined as the percentage of words transcribed correctly.

Question 15

How was realibility evaluated?

Answer 15

Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients and differences amongst groups were evaluated by mixed-effects models, in accordance with the intention-to-treat approach.

Question 16

Blindness?

Answer 16

Listeners, data collectors, and data managers were blinded to treatment conditions and groups.

Question 17

What were the findings? Between different groups? Numbers?

Answer 17

57 patients, in the voice (n=19), articulation (n=19) and no treatment (n=19).

Between-group differences (d) in changes from baseline to post-treatment in TA indicated significantly greater increases following treatment targeting voice than treatment targeting articulation.

Differences between TA changes in the treatment targeting voice and in the no treatment group were significant

Differences between TA changes in the treatment targeting articulation and in the no treatment group were not significant