The purpose of our study was to provide effective speech evaluation items examining the variables of speech that successfully predict the speech intelligibility in CP children. The subjects were 55 children with spastic type cerebral palsy. As for the speech evaluation, we performed a speech subsyst...
The purpose of our study was to provide effective speech evaluation items examining the variables of speech that successfully predict the speech intelligibility in CP children. The subjects were 55 children with spastic type cerebral palsy. As for the speech evaluation, we performed a speech subsystem evaluation and a speech intelligibility test. The results of the study are as follows. The evaluation task for the speech subsystems consisted of 48 task items within an observational evaluation stage and three levels of severity. The levels showed correlations with gross motor functions, fine motor functions, and age. Second, the evaluation items for the speech subsystems were rearranged into seven factors. Third, 34 out of 48 task items that positively correlated with the syllable intelligibility rating were as follows. There were four items in the observational evaluation stage. Among the nonverbal articulatory function evaluation items, there were 11 items in level one. There were 12 items in level two. In level three there were eight items. Fourth, there were 23 items among the 48 evaluation tasks that correlated with the sentence intelligibility rating. There was one item in the observational evaluation stage which was in the articulatory structure evaluation task. In level one there were six items. In level two, there were eight items. In level three, there was a total number of eight items. Fifth, there was a total number of 14 items that influenced the syllable intelligibility rating. Sixth, there was a total number of 13 items that influenced the syllable intelligibility rating. According to the results above, the variables that influenced the speech intelligibility of CP children among the articulatory function tasks were in the respiratory function task, phonatory function task, and lip and chin related tasks. We did not find any correlation for the tongue function. The results of our study could be applied to speech evaluation, setting therapy goals, and evaluating the degree of progression in children with CP. We only studied children with the spastic type of cerebral palsy, and there were a small number of severe degree CP children compared to those with a moderate degree of CP. Therefore, when evaluating children with other degrees of severity, we may have to take their characteristics more into account. Further study on speech evaluation variables in relation to the severity of the speech intelligibility and different types of cerebral palsy may be necessary.
The purpose of our study was to provide effective speech evaluation items examining the variables of speech that successfully predict the speech intelligibility in CP children. The subjects were 55 children with spastic type cerebral palsy. As for the speech evaluation, we performed a speech subsystem evaluation and a speech intelligibility test. The results of the study are as follows. The evaluation task for the speech subsystems consisted of 48 task items within an observational evaluation stage and three levels of severity. The levels showed correlations with gross motor functions, fine motor functions, and age. Second, the evaluation items for the speech subsystems were rearranged into seven factors. Third, 34 out of 48 task items that positively correlated with the syllable intelligibility rating were as follows. There were four items in the observational evaluation stage. Among the nonverbal articulatory function evaluation items, there were 11 items in level one. There were 12 items in level two. In level three there were eight items. Fourth, there were 23 items among the 48 evaluation tasks that correlated with the sentence intelligibility rating. There was one item in the observational evaluation stage which was in the articulatory structure evaluation task. In level one there were six items. In level two, there were eight items. In level three, there was a total number of eight items. Fifth, there was a total number of 14 items that influenced the syllable intelligibility rating. Sixth, there was a total number of 13 items that influenced the syllable intelligibility rating. According to the results above, the variables that influenced the speech intelligibility of CP children among the articulatory function tasks were in the respiratory function task, phonatory function task, and lip and chin related tasks. We did not find any correlation for the tongue function. The results of our study could be applied to speech evaluation, setting therapy goals, and evaluating the degree of progression in children with CP. We only studied children with the spastic type of cerebral palsy, and there were a small number of severe degree CP children compared to those with a moderate degree of CP. Therefore, when evaluating children with other degrees of severity, we may have to take their characteristics more into account. Further study on speech evaluation variables in relation to the severity of the speech intelligibility and different types of cerebral palsy may be necessary.
뇌성마비는 미성숙한 뇌의 비진행성 병변이나 손상으로 운동 및 자세의 영구적인 이상이 발생되는 질환의 통칭으로 정의된다. 뇌성마비는 운동신경손상 및 양상에 따라 경직형(spastic), 운동이상형(dyskinetic), 운동실조형(ataxic), 혼합형(mixed type) 등으로 분류된다[1]. 뇌성마비로 인한 근육 조절의 문제는 대근육 운동 뿐만 아니라 주요 말 산출 기관의 조절에도 영향을 미치며[2], 이로 인해 나타나는 뇌성마비아동들의 말장애는 마비말장애로 분류된다[3]-[6].
뇌성마비란 무엇인가?
뇌성마비는 미성숙한 뇌의 비진행성 병변이나 손상으로 운동 및 자세의 영구적인 이상이 발생되는 질환의 통칭으로 정의된다. 뇌성마비는 운동신경손상 및 양상에 따라 경직형(spastic), 운동이상형(dyskinetic), 운동실조형(ataxic), 혼합형(mixed type) 등으로 분류된다[1].
뇌성마비아동애서 관찰되는 말하부체계별 손상에 따른 호흡, 발성, 공명, 조음에 대한 특징은 무엇인가?
뇌성마비아동에서 관찰되는 말하부체계별 손상에 따른 호흡, 발성, 공명, 조음에 대한 특징은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 호흡기능의 경우 일반적으로 조용한 호흡과 말 산출을 위한 호흡이 모두 손상되어 있다[10]-[12]. 전반적으로 폐활량이 감소되어 있는데 이는 호흡근육 및 복근이 약화되었기 때문이다. 또한 성문하부의 압력을 만들어내고 유지하는 능력에 장애가 관찰되는데 이는 성문과 연인두, 구강 등을 통해 밖으로 나가는 기류를 조정하는 밸브역할이 제대로 수행되지 못하기 때문이다[12], [13].
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.