Journal Articles
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915
Browse
5 results
Search Results
Item Who really decides? Feeding decisions 'made' by caregivers of children with cerebral palsy.(AOSIS (Pty) Ltd., 2024-03-18) Naidoo L; Pillay M; Naidoo UBACKGROUND: There are no definitive guidelines for clinical decisions for children with cerebral palsy (CP) requiring enteral feeds. Traditionally, medical doctors made enteral feeding decisions, while patients were essentially treated passively within a paternalistic 'doctor knows best' approach. Although a more collaborative approach to decision-making has been promoted globally as the favoured model among healthcare professionals, little is known about how these decisions are currently made practically. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify the significant individuals, factors and views involved in the enteral feeding decision-making process for caregivers of children with CP within the South African public healthcare sector. METHOD: A single-case research design was used in this qualitative explorative study. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four primary individuals were identified by the caregivers in the decision-making process: doctors, speech therapists, caregivers' families and God. Four factors were identified as extrinsically motivating: (1) physiological factors, (2) nutritional factors, (3) financial factors and (4) environmental factors. Two views were identified as intrinsically motivating: personal beliefs regarding enteral feeding tubes, and feelings of fear and isolation. CONCLUSION: Enteral feeding decision-making within the South African public healthcare sector is currently still dominated by a paternalistic approach, endorsed by a lack of caregiver knowledge, distinct patient-healthcare provider power imbalances and prescriptive multidisciplinary healthcare dialogues.Contribution: This study has implications for clinical practice, curriculum development at higher education training facilities, and institutional policy changes and development, thereby contributing to the current knowledge and clinical gap(s) in the area.Item A survey of communication supports in Grade R classrooms in the Western Cape, South Africa(AOSIS, 2022-10-28) Kathard H; Parusnath P; Thabane L; Pillay M; Jing Hu Z; Le Roux J; Harty M; O Carrol S; Mallick RBBackground: Early classroom communication supports are critical in influencing oral language development and emergent literacy skills. It is both support from peers and adults, as well as the environment that impacts the quality and efficacy of language learning. Schools in particular play a key role in communication development, which will be further explored in this article. Objectives: To describe how communication was being supported in the classroom by teachers in the areas of language-learning environment (LLE), language-learning interactions (LLIs) and language-learning opportunities (LLOs) to focus on classroom communication supports to strengthen literacy outcomes for Grade R learners. Method: A cross-sectional descriptive survey of classrooms was conducted using a structured observation method in 136 classrooms. The Communication Supporting Classroom Observation Tool was used to make 223 observations across classrooms of LLE (19 items), LLI (20 items) and LLO (5 items). A descriptive analysis of frequency of occurrence of items was conducted for each domain. Results: Language-learning environment had more frequently occurring observations, with 12 out of 19 items being observed with a frequency of occurrence greater than 65%, indicating that the environment had adequate basic resources (e.g. good light). Language-learning interactions scores indicated that 3 out of 20 items were observed frequently, while 17 out of 20 items were observed less frequently (56.5%), including interactive strategies (e.g. turn-taking). Language Learning Opportunities scores indicated that teacher-led behaviours (e.g. including children in small group activities) were infrequently observed on all items. Conclusion: While the physical environment was generally supportive, the behaviours in the interactive domains of LLI and LLO were observed less frequently. There is potential for speech–language therapists to work collaboratively with teachers to develop communication supporting classrooms as a critical primary-level intervention for language-literacy learning.Item The Classroom Communication Resource (CCR) intervention to change peer’s attitudes towards children who stutter (CWS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial(BioMed Central Ltd, 2018-01-17) Mallick R; Kathard H; Thabane L; Pillay MBackground Children who stutter (CWS) are at a high-risk of being teased and bullied in primary school because of negative peer attitudes and perceptions towards stuttering. There is little evidence to determine if classroom-based interventions are effective in changing peer attitudes towards stuttering. The primary objective is to determine the effect of the Classroom Communication Resource (CCR) intervention versus usual practice, measured using the Stuttering Resource Outcomes Measure (SROM) 6-months post-intervention among grade 7 students. The secondary objective is to investigate attitude changes towards stuttering among grade participants on the SROM subscales. Methods A cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted with schools as the unit of randomization. Schools will be stratified into quintile groups, and then randomized to receive the CCR intervention or usual practice. Quintile stratification will be conducted in accordance to the Western Cape Department of Education classification of schools according to geographical location, fee per school and allocation of resources and funding. Participants will include primary schools in the lower (second and third) and higher (fourth and fifth) quintiles and children aged 11 years or older in grade 7 will be included. The study will consist of the CCR intervention program or usual practice as a no-CCR control. The CCR is a classroom-based, teacher led intervention tool including a story, role-play and discussion. The grade 7 teachers allocated to the CCR intervention, will be trained and will administer the intervention. The analysis will follow intention-to-treat (ITT) principle and generalized estimating equations (GEE) to compare groups on the global SROM and its subscales to account for possible clustering within schools. The subgroup hypothesis will be tested by adding an interaction term of quintile group x intervention. Discussion This study is designed to assess whether the CCR intervention versus usual practice in schools will lead to positive shift in attitudes about stuttering at 6-months post-intervention among grade 7 participants. Trial registration The trial number is NCT03111524. It was registered with clinical trials.gov Protocol registration and results system (PRS) retrospectively on 9 March 2017.Item Children with HIV: A scoping review of auditory processing skills(PLoS (Public Library of Science), 2019-09-12) Dawood G; Klop D; Olivier E; Elliott H; Pillay MIIntroduction Auditory processing disorders can negatively affect academic performance in children. They can result from a number of aetiologies, including the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Although studies in paediatrics are limited, research suggests that HIV-infected children display poorer auditory processing skills than uninfected children. Methods The aims of this study were to scan the peer-reviewed literature on auditory processing skills in HIV-infected children, to describe how auditory processing was tested, how auditory processing skills were reported, and to identify gaps in current evidence. This systematic scoping review was conducted using a modified version of Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. Key words comprised ‘HIV’, ‘auditory processing’, ‘hearing’ and ‘child’. Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles published from 1 January 2000 to 30 April 2018, and reference lists of included studies were pearled. Two researchers reviewed the articles and extracted data on sample descriptors, auditory processing testing procedures, and auditory processing skills. A third author collated the results and resolved discrepancies. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association description of auditory processing skills framed the analysis. Results Five articles were included in this review (three from Brazil, one each from Mexico and Tanzania). Samples, and methods of testing were heterogeneous. Three studies reported on localization abilities, while gap detection thresholds, performance on dichotic tasks and speech discrimination scores were reported in one article each. No one study tested all areas of auditory processing skills and there was limited information about the auditory processing skills required for learning. Conclusion This review highlighted the current sparse evidence-base for auditory processing in HIV-infected children. It identified the need to standardise testing procedures, measures of auditory processing skills, and sample selection.Item A cluster randomised trial of a classroom communication resource program to change peer attitudes towards children who stutter among grade 7 students(BioMed Central Ltd, 2018-11-29) Mallick R; Kathard H; Borhan ASM; Pillay M; Thabane LBackground Classroom-based stuttering intervention addressing negative peer attitudes, perceptions, teasing and bullying of children who stutter (CWS) is required as part of holistic stuttering management because of its occurrence in primary school. This study was conducted in 2017, in 10 primary schools in the Western Cape, South Africa within lower (second and third) and higher (fourth and fifth) quintiles. Objectives The primary objective of this study was to determine treatment effect at six months after intervention of grade 7 participants (Classroom Communication Resource [CCR] intervention versus no CCR) using global Stuttering Resource Outcomes Measure (SROM) scores in school clusters. The secondary objective was to determine grade 7 participant treatment effect on the SROM subscales including Positive Social Distance (PSD), Social Pressure (SP) and Verbal Interaction (VI). The subgroup objective was to determine any difference in the primary outcome between schools between and across quintile clusters (lower and higher). Methods Once schools were stratified into lower and higher quintile (which are defined according to geographical location, fee per school and resources) subgroup clusters, schools were assigned randomly to control and intervention groups consisting of grade 7 participants who were typically aged ≥ 11 years. Teachers received 1 h of training before administering the single-dose CCR intervention over a 60–90-min session. The CCR intervention included a social story, role-play and discussion. All participants viewed a video of a CWS and stuttering was defined at baseline. The SROM measured peer attitudes at six months after intervention. Randomisation was stratified by quintile group using a 1:1 allocation ratio. Full blinding was not possible; however, the outcome assessor was partially blinded and the analyst was also blinded. Generalised estimating equations (GEE) was used assuming an exchangeable correlation structure to analyse the data adopting an intention-to-treat principle. Multiple imputation was used to handle missing data. Criterion for statistical significance was set at alpha = 0.05. Results Ten schools were randomly allocated to control (k = 5) and intervention groups (k = 5), with n = 223 participants allocated to intervention and n = 231 to control groups. A total of 454 participants completed the SROMs in control (n = 231) and intervention (n = 223) groups and were analysed at baseline and six months after intervention. There was no statistically significant difference on the global SROM score (mean difference − 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] − 1.56–1.34; p = 0.88). There were also no significant differences on SROM subscales: PSD (mean difference 1.04; 95% CI − 1.02–311; p = 0.32), SP (mean difference − 0.45; 95% CI − 1.22–0.26; p = 0.21) and VI (mean difference 0.05; 95% CI − 1.01–1.11; p = 0.93). Additionally, there was no significant subgroup effect on the global SROM score (lower versus higher quintile subgroups) (interaction p value = 0.52). No harms were noted or reported. Conclusion No statistically significant differences were noted. It is possible that the time frame was too short to note changes in peer attitudes and that further study is required to confirm the findings of this study. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03111524. Registered on 9 March 2017.