With the COVID-19 pandemic necessitating the adoption of telepractice for providing speech and language therapy services, this study investigated the factors affecting the perceptions and the implementation of telepractice for school-age children by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in the Philippines. Sixty-four SLPs completed a 36-item online survey assessing the adoption of telepractice, implementation concerns, student candidacy, continuous training in telepractice, and the SLPs’ demographics. The SLPs reported that they quickly adopted telepractice in their services for school-age students at the start of the pandemic. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that SLPs’ perceptions of the effectiveness of telepractice were significantly affected by implementation difficulties while SLPs’ future use of telepractice was significantly predicted by training and resource availability. These results suggest that professional training and other therapeutic resources are needed to alleviate SLPs’ concerns about difficulties in implementing and continuing use of telepractice.
AggarwalK.PatelR.RaviR. (2020). Uptake of telepractice among speech-language therapists following COVID-19 pandemic in India. Speech, Language and Hearing, 24, 224–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/2050571X.2020.1812034
AmoraK.GarciaR.GagarinaN. (2020). Tagalog adaptation of the Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives: History, process and preliminary results. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 64, 221–233. https://doi.org/10.21248/zaspil.64.2020.577
4.
BondocI. P.MabagV.DacanayC. A.MacapagalN. D. (2017). Speech-language pathology research in the Philippines in retrospect: Perspectives from a developing country. International Journal of Speech-language Pathology, 19(6), 628–636. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2016.1226954
ChenS.LiS.LiC. (2011). Recent related research in technology acceptance model: A literature review. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(9), 124–127. https://doi.org/10.52283/nswrca.ajbmr.20110109a14.
7.
ChengW.OleaT.MarzanJ. (2002). Speech-language pathology in the Philippines: Reflections on the past and present, perspective for the future. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 54, 79–82. https://doi.org/10.1159/000057920
8.
ChuaE.GorgonE. (2019). Augmentative and alternative communication in the Philippines: A survey of speech-language pathologist competence, training and practice. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 35(2), 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2019.1576223
9.
CohenJ.WestS. G.AikenL.CohenP. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
DavisF. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
11.
de WinterJ. D.DodouD.WieringaP. A. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44(2), 147–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170902794206.
12.
EdwardsM.Stredler-BrownA.HoustonK. (2012). Expanding use of telepractice in speech language pathology and audiology. The Volta Review, 112(3), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.17955/tvr.112.3.m.704
13.
FinestackL. H.SatterlundK. E. (2018). Current practice of child grammar intervention: A survey of speech-language pathologists. American Journal of Speech-language Pathology, 27(4), 1329–1351. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0168
14.
FongR.TsaiC. F.YiuO. Y. (2020). The implementation of telepractice in speech language pathology in Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic. Telemedicine and E-health, 27(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2020.0223
15.
HaoY.ZhangS.ConnerA.LeeN. Y. (2021). The evolution of telepractice use during the COVID-19 pandemic: Perspectives of pediatric speech-language pathologists. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(22), 12197. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182212197
16.
HebbelerK.RooneyR. (2009). Accountability for services for young children with disabilities and the assessment of meaningful outcomes: The role of the speech-language pathologist. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40(4), 446–456. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0025)
17.
HinesM.LincolnM.RamsdenR.MartinovichJ.FairweatherC. (2015). Speech pathologists’ perspectives on transitioning to telepractice: What factors promote acceptance?Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 21(8), 469–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X15604555
KennedyP. (2008). Guide to econometrics. Wiley-Blackwell.
20.
LamJ. H. Y.ChiuM. M.LeeS. M. K.TongS. X. (in press). Psychosocial Factors, but not Professional Practice Skills, Linked to Self-Perceived Effectiveness of Telepractice in School-based Speech and Language Therapists during COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12773
21.
LamJ. H. Y.LeeS. M. K.TongX. (2021). Parents’ and students’ perceptions of telepractice services for speech-language therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: Survey study. JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting, 4(1), e25675 https://doi.org/10.2196/25675.
22.
LeochicoC. F. D.EspirituA. I.IgnacioS. D.MojicaJ. A. P. (2020). Challenges to the emergence of telerehabilitation in a developing country: A systematic review. Frontiers in Neurology, 11, 1007. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.01007
23.
MashimaP. A.DoarnC. R. (2008). Overview of telehealth activities in speech-language pathology. Telemedicine and E-health, 14(10), 1101–1117. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2008.0080
MendenhallW.SincichT.BoudreauN. S. (1996). A second course in statistics: Regression analysis (Vol. 5). Prentice Hall.
26.
MohanH.AnjumA.RaoP. (2017). A survey of telepractice in speech-language pathology and audiology in India. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 9(1), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2017.6233
27.
OommenE. R.McCarthyJ. W. (2015). Simultaneous natural speech and AAC interventions for children with childhood apraxia of speech: Lessons from a speech-language pathologist focus group. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md.: 1985), 31(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2014.1001520
28.
OverbyM. (2018). Stakeholder’s qualitative perspectives of effective telepractice pedagogy in speech-language pathology. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorder, 53(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12329
29.
Philippine Association of Speech Pathologists. (2020). Guidelines for speech-language pathology practice in the Philippines during the COVID-19 pandemic. http://pasp.org.ph/Guidelines-for-SLP-Practice
Ponciano-VillafaniaJ.OdtuhanE.TriaC.CapaciteJ.DequinaM.AlanoJ.CajucomB. (2018, November). Feasibility of telerehabilitation in the service delivery of speech-language pathology in the Philippines [Poster Presentation]. 11th pan-pacific conference of rehabilitation2018, Hong Kong.
RichardsonJ. C.MaedaY.LvJ.CaskurluS. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001.
34.
SchererR.SiddiqF.TondeurJ. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computer & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
35.
SnodgrassM.ChungM.BillerM.AppelK.MeadanH.HalleJ. (2017). Telepractice in speech-language therapy: The use of online technologies for parent training and coaching. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 38(4), 242–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740116680424
StaleyB.O’BoyleJ.ArmstrongE.CoonanE.TaylorL.DuttonJ. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on professional practice in the Northern Territory, Australia. Perspectives, 5(6), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_PERSP-20-00090.
38.
SwalesM.TheodorosD.HillA. J.RussellT. (2020). Speech-language pathologists’ perceptions of the use of telepractice in the delivery of services to people with Parkinson’s disease: A national pilot survey. International Journal of Speech-language Pathology, 22(4), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2019.1650110
39.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S.UllmanJ. B. (2007). Perspectives of SLPs on the use of telepractice in schools: The qualitative view. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 4(2), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2012.6102.
40.
TuckerJ. K. (2012). Perspectives of SLPs on the use of telepractice in schools: The qualitative view. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 4(2), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2012.6102
YooJ.YoonM.LeeC.HongG.ChoiS. (2021). An exploratory survey of priorities in establishing telepractice system for SLPs and caregivers in Korea. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 42(4), 230–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740120916414
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
