How I experienced tele-intervention: Qualitative insights from persons who stutter.
Raadhiyah Hoosain, Shabnam Abdoola, Esedra Krüger and 1 others
PMID 39935169WHAT IT FOUND
Eleven people who stutter in South Africa described tele-intervention as viable despite poor internet and power cuts.
They valued flexibility and home comfort but preferred in-person therapy for better communication. All would recommend tele-intervention to others.
Key findings
01Ten of eleven participants reported benefits like scheduling flexibility and reduced travel, with ten also perceiving improvements in fluency.
02Poor network connections disrupted therapy for eight participants, and electricity interruptions affected five, though nine said these did not stop their active participation.
03Five participants preferred in-person therapy for its lack of technical issues and better non-verbal communication, yet all eleven would recommend tele-intervention to others.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample size was very small (n=11), limiting generalizability. All participants were from a single university clinic in South Africa, so experiences may not reflect broader cultural or regional contexts. Findings rely on self-report, which may introduce bias. The study did not measure actual clinical outcomes like stuttering frequency, only perceived improvements.
Declared interests
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the participants' perceived improvements in fluency as evidence of clinical efficacy. The study measured subjective experience and satisfaction, not objective stuttering reduction, and the small sample size prevents generalizing these preferences to all clients.