Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec
En un contexto en el que existen diferentes protocolos para las prácticas recomendadas en la evaluación vocal clínica, y en el que se presentan vacíos en la literatura respecto a la base de evidencia que respalda los procedimientos y medidas de evaluación, los profesionales de regiones donde no hay una comunidad sólida con experiencia en prácticas vocales clínicas y científicas pueden enfrentar dificultades para desarrollar con confianza sus prácticas de evaluación vocal. Con el propósito de mejorar las prácticas de evaluación vocal y fortalecer la identidad profesional entre los logopedas de Quebec, Canadá, se estableció una comunidad de práctica (CdP). Esta tenía como objetivo fomentar el intercambio de conocimientos, implementar cambios... Ver más
Guardado en:
2665-2056
6
2024-01-29
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud - 2024
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
| id |
db150731df80ef205b55308696f165d8 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| institution |
FUNDACION UNIVERSITARIA MARIA CANO |
| thumbnail |
https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/FUNDACIONUNIVERSITARIAMARIACANO/logo.png |
| country_str |
Colombia |
| collection |
Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud |
| title |
Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec |
| spellingShingle |
Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec Verduyckt, Ingrid Defoy, Lyne Hocine, Imane Martel-Sauvageau, Vincent comunidad de práctica práctica basada en evidencia identidad profesional evaluación vocal Patología del habla y del lenguaje Speech language pathology voice assessment professional identity evidence-based practice community of practice |
| title_short |
Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec |
| title_full |
Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec |
| title_fullStr |
Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec |
| title_sort |
resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de quebec |
| description |
En un contexto en el que existen diferentes protocolos para las prácticas recomendadas en la evaluación vocal clínica, y en el que se presentan vacíos en la literatura respecto a la base de evidencia que respalda los procedimientos y medidas de evaluación, los profesionales de regiones donde no hay una comunidad sólida con experiencia en prácticas vocales clínicas y científicas pueden enfrentar dificultades para desarrollar con confianza sus prácticas de evaluación vocal. Con el propósito de mejorar las prácticas de evaluación vocal y fortalecer la identidad profesional entre los logopedas de Quebec, Canadá, se estableció una comunidad de práctica (CdP). Esta tenía como objetivo fomentar el intercambio de conocimientos, implementar cambios en la práctica clínica y mejorar la identidad profesional. Un total de treinta y nueve participantes se involucraron en las actividades de la CdP, llevadas a cabo durante un período de cuatro meses, que incluyeron reuniones virtuales y talleres presenciales. Los participantes tuvieron una alta tasa de asistencia (> 74% de participación en las reuniones virtuales) y expresaron un alto grado de satisfacción con su participación, manifestando su intención de continuar involucrados después de la finalización del proyecto. Se observaron cambios estadísticamente significativos en las prácticas de evaluación vocal posterior a la CdP, en lo que respecta a la probabilidad de llevar a cabo evaluaciones (p < .001) y la percepción de la importancia de la evaluación con fines evaluativos (p < .001), así como mejoras en la confianza específica en la evaluación, particularmente en el procedimiento de evaluación auditivo-perceptual (p < .001) y el propósito de la evaluación aerodinámica (p = .05). Además, se registró un aumento en la identidad profesional posterior a la CdP (p < .001) y los participantes sintieron que obtuvieron aprendizajes significativos. El presente estudio destacó la necesidad de involucrar a los logopedas en investigaciones futuras, para identificar evaluaciones pertinentes a los objetivos evaluativos específicos de los logopedas que trabajan con la voz, y sugiere que las CdP son una herramienta eficiente con ese propósito.
|
| description_eng |
In a context where different protocols for recommended practices in clinical voice assessment exist, while there are gaps in the literature regarding the evidence base supporting assessment procedures and measures, clinicians from regions where a strong community holding expertise in clinical and scientific voice practices lack can struggle to confidently develop their voice assessment practices. In an effort to improve voice assessment practices and strengthen professional identity among speech-language pathologists in Quebec, Canada, a community of practice (CoP) was established, with the aim of promoting knowledge sharing, implementing change in clinical practice, and improving professional identity. Thirty-nine participants took part in the CoP activities conducted over a four-month period, including virtual meetings and in-person workshops. Participants had a high rate of attendance (> 74% participation rate in virtual meetings), and were highly satisfied with their participation and intended to remain involved after the project’s end. Statistically significant changes in voice assessment practices were observed post-CoP, regarding probability of performing assessments (p < .001), and perceived importance of assessment for evaluative purposes (p <.001), as well as improvements in assessment specific confidence, specifically for procedure of auditory-perceptual assessment (p < .001) and purpose of aerodynamic assessment (p = .05). Moreover, there was an increase in professional identity post-CoP (p < .001) and participants felt they made significant learnings. The present study highlighted the need to involve SLPs in future research to identify assessments that are relevant to the specific evaluative objectives of SLPs working with voice, and suggests CoPs are an efficient tool for that purpose.
|
| author |
Verduyckt, Ingrid Defoy, Lyne Hocine, Imane Martel-Sauvageau, Vincent |
| author_facet |
Verduyckt, Ingrid Defoy, Lyne Hocine, Imane Martel-Sauvageau, Vincent |
| topicspa_str_mv |
comunidad de práctica práctica basada en evidencia identidad profesional evaluación vocal Patología del habla y del lenguaje |
| topic |
comunidad de práctica práctica basada en evidencia identidad profesional evaluación vocal Patología del habla y del lenguaje Speech language pathology voice assessment professional identity evidence-based practice community of practice |
| topic_facet |
comunidad de práctica práctica basada en evidencia identidad profesional evaluación vocal Patología del habla y del lenguaje Speech language pathology voice assessment professional identity evidence-based practice community of practice |
| citationvolume |
6 |
| citationissue |
1 |
| publisher |
Fundación Universitaria María Cano |
| ispartofjournal |
Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud |
| source |
https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/view/254 |
| language |
Inglés |
| format |
Article |
| rights |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud - 2024 http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| references_eng |
Roy N, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Eadie T, Sivasankar MP, Mehta D, Paul D, et al. Evidence-Based Clinical Voice Assessment: A Systematic Review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2013;22(2):212-26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2012/12-0014) 2. Dejonckere PH, Bradley P, Clemente P, Cornut G, Crevier-Buchman L, Friedrich G, et al. A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2001;258(2):77-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004050000299 3. Behrman A. Common Practices of Voice Therapists in the Evaluation of Patients. Journal of Voice. 2005;19(3):454-69. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2004.08.004 4. Patel RR, Awan SN, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Courey M, Deliyski D, Eadie T, et al. Recommended Protocols for Instrumental Assessment of Voice: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Expert Panel to Develop a Protocol for Instrumental Assessment of Vocal Function. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018;27(3):887-905. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0009 5. Mattei A, Desuter G, Roux M, Lee BJ, Louges MA, Osipenko E, et al. International consensus (ICON) on basic voice assessment for unilateral vocal fold paralysis. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2018;135(1s):S11-s5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2017.12.007 6. Roy N. Assessment and treatment of musculoskeletal tension in hyperfunctional voice disorders. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2008;10(4):195-209. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17549500701885577 7. Estes CM, Johnson AM. Practical Considerations for Instrumental Acoustic and Aerodynamic Assessment of Voice: Discussion Points From an Open Forum of Clinicians. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. 2023;8(6):1354-62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_PERSP-23-00039 8. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312(7023):71-2. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 9. https://www.asha.org [Internet]. Rockville: ASHA AS-L-HA; 2023. Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) . Available from: https://www.asha.org/research/ebp/ 10. Speech-Language & Audiology Canada (SAC). Official Statement on Evidence-Based Speech-Language Pathology Practice in Schools [press release]. 22 june 2021. Available from: https://www.sac-oac.ca 11. Fitzgerald A. Professional identity: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum [Internet]. 2020;Apr 6;55(3):447–72. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12450 12. Holmes C, McDonald F, Jones M, Ozdemir V, Graham JE. Standardization and omics science: technical and social dimensions are inseparable and demand symmetrical study. Omics. 2010;14(3):327-32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/omi.2010.0022 13. Almklov PG, Rosness R, Størkersen K. When safety science meets the practitioners: Does safety science contribute to marginalization of practical knowledge? Safety Science. 2014;67:25-36. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.025 14. Arcand, L. La communauté de pratique un outil pertinent : résumé des connaissances adaptées au contexte de la santé publique, Institut national de santé publique du Québec. Canada. 2018. Available from: https://policycommons.net/artifacts/2052225/la-communaute-de-pratique-un-outil-pertinent/2805316/ 15. Lof GL. Science-based practice and the speech-language pathologist. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2011;13(3):189-96. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/17549507.2011.528801 16. Lemire N. Animer un processus de transfert des connaissances bilan des connaissances et outil d'animation / [auteures [...]. Montréal. 2009. 17. Li LC, Grimshaw JM, Nielsen C, Judd M, Coyte PC, Graham ID. Evolution of Wenger's concept of community of practice. Implementation Science. 2009;4(1):11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-11 18. https://www.asha.org [Internet]. Rockville: ASHA AS-L-HA; 2023. About Special Interest Group 3, Voice and Upper Airway Disorders [cited 2023 15th of July]. Available from: https://www.asha.org/sig/03/about-sig-3/ 19. Wenger E, McDermott R, Snyder W. Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School; 2002. 20. Renaud L, Caron Bouchard M, Gaudreault-Perron J, Gayraud H. Communauté de pratique dans le domaine de la promotion de la santé : analyse du sentiment d’appartenance et des pratiques de leadership. Communiquer Revue de communication sociale et publique. 2017;19:29-45. doi: https://doi.org/10.4000/communiquer.2147 21. Ranmuthugala G, Plumb JJ, Cunningham FC, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Braithwaite J. How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Services Research. 2011;11(1):273. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-273 22. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co; 1997.. 23. Holland K, Middleton L, Uys L. Professional confidence: A concept analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2012;19(2):214-24. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/11038128.2011.583939 24. Pasupathy R, Bogschutz RJ. An Investigation of Graduate Speech-Language Pathology Students' SLP Clinical Self-Efficacy. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders. 2013;40(Fall):151-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/cicsd_40_F_151 25. Tremblay D-G. Les communautés de pratique: quels sont les facteurs de succès. Revue internationale sur le travail et la société. 2005;3(2):692-722. 26. Mishra P, Pandey CM, Singh U, Gupta A, Sahu C, Keshri A. Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Ann Card Anaesth. 2019;22(1):67-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18 27. Pallant J. SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. London: McGraw-Hill Education; 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117445 28. Desjardins M, Halstead L, Cooke M, Bonilha HS. A Systematic Review of Voice Therapy: What “Effectiveness” Really Implies. Journal of Voice. 2017;31(3):392.e13-.e32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.10.002 29. Speyer R. Effects of voice therapy: a systematic review. Journal of Voice. 2008;22(5):565-80. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2006.10.005 30. Kenny C. Assessment practices of Irish speech and language therapists in the evaluation of voice disorders. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology. 2017;42(1):12-21. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/14015439.2015.1121291 31. McAlister S, Yanushevskaya I. Voice assessment practices of speech and language therapists in Ireland. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics. 2020;34(1-2):29-53. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2019.1610798 32. Patel RR, Ternström S. Quantitative and Qualitative Electroglottographic Wave Shape Differences in Children and Adults Using Voice Map-Based Analysis. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021;64(8):2977-95. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00717 33. Herbst CT. Electroglottography - An Update. J Voice. 2020;34(4):503-26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.12.014 34. Cheyne HA, Nuss RC, Hillman RE. Electroglottography in the pediatric population. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;125(10):1105-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.125.10.1105 35. Ramig LO, Dromey C. Aerodynamic mechanisms underlying treatment-related changes in vocal intensity in patients with Parkinson disease. J Speech Hear Res. 1996;39(4):798-807. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3904.798 36. Vaca M, Cobeta I, Mora E, Reyes P. Clinical Assessment of Glottal Insufficiency in Age-related Dysphonia. Journal of Voice. 2017;31(1):128.e1-.e5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.12.010 37. Mayes RW, Jackson-Menaldi C, DeJonckere PH, Moyer CA, Rubin AD. Laryngeal Electroglottography as a Predictor of Laryngeal Electromyography. Journal of Voice. 2008;22(6):756-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.03.005 38. Ramírez DAM, Jiménez VMV, López XH, Ysunza PA. Acoustic Analysis of Voice and Electroglottography in Patients With Laryngopharyngeal Reflux. Journal of Voice. 2018;32(3):281-4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.05.009 39. Albudoor N, Peña ED. Factors influencing US speech and language therapists’ use of technology for clinical practice. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. 2021;56(3):567-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12614 40. Oates J. Auditory-perceptual evaluation of disordered voice quality: pros, cons and future directions. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2009;61(1):49-56. doi: https://doi.org/10.1159/000200768 41. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR. Perceptual assessment of voice quality: Past, present, and future. Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders. 2010;20(2):62-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/vvd20.2.62 42. Barnett S, Jones SC, Bennett S, Iverson D, Bonney A. Perceptions of family physician trainees and trainers regarding the usefulness of a virtual community of practice. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(5):e92. doi: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2555 43. Barnett S, Jones SC, Caton T, Iverson D, Bennett S, Robinson L. Implementing a virtual community of practice for family physician training: a mixed-methods case study. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(3):e83. doi: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3083 44. Grol R, Wensing M. Implementation of Change in Healthcare. In: Wensing M, Grol R, Grimshaw J, editors. Improving Patient Care. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2020. p. 1-20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119488620.ch1 45. Mehta D, Hillman RE. Use of aerodynamic measures in clinical voice assessment. Perspectives on voice and voice disorders. 2007;17(3):14-8 doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/vvd17.3.14 46. Pillot-Loiseau C. Pression sous-glottique et débit oral d'air expiré comme aides à la pose du diagnostic de dysodie; implications pour la rééducation vocale. Entretiens d'orthophonie. 2011;32-45. Available from: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00609092/ 47. Lim KH, Ward LM, Benbasat I. An Empirical Study of Computer System Learning: Comparison of Co-Discovery and Self-Discovery Methods. Information Systems Research. 1997;8(3):254-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.8.3.254 48. Neufeld D, Fang Y, Wan Z. Community of Practice Behaviors and Individual Learning Outcomes. Group Decision and Negotiation. 2013;22(4):617-39. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-012-9284-8 49. Cook JM, O’Donnell C, Dinnen S, Coyne JC, Ruzek JI, Schnurr PP. Measurement of a model of implementation for health care: toward a testable theory. Implementation Science. 2012;7(1):1-15 doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-59 50. Hajian S. Transfer of learning and teaching: A review of transfer theories and effective instructional practices. IAFOR Journal of education. 2019;7(1):93-111. doi: https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.7.1.06 51. Correia AMR. Virtual communities of practice: Investigating motivations and constraints in the processes of knowledge creation and transfer. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management. 2010;8(1):11-20. Available from: https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejkm/article/view/885 52. Fahey R, Vasconcelos AC, Ellis D. The impact of rewards within communities of practice: a study of the SAP online global community. Knowledge Management Research & Practice. 2007;5(3):186-98. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500140 53. Ikioda F, Kendall S, Brooks F, De Liddo A, Buckingham Shum S. Factors That Influence Healthcare Professionals’ Online Interaction in a Virtual Community of Practice. Social Networking. 2013;02:174-84. doi: https://doi.org/10.4236/sn.2013.24017 54. McLoughlin C, Patel KD, O’Callaghan T, Reeves S. The use of virtual communities of practice to improve interprofessional collaboration and education: findings from an integrated review. Journal of interprofessional care. 2018;32(2):136-42 doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1377692 55. Jackson BN, Purdy SC, Cooper-Thomas HD. Role of Professional Confidence in the Development of Expert Allied Health Professionals: A Narrative Review. J Allied Health. 2019;48(3):226-32. Available from: https://tinyurl.com/yutyqxcp 56. Grimm P. Social Desirability Bias. In: Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2010. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444316568.wiem02057 57. van Mersbergen M, Ostrem J, Titze IR. Preparation of the speech-language pathologist specializing in voice: an educational survey. J Voice. 2001;15(2):237-50. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(01)00024-8 58. Procter T, Codino J, Rubin A. Finding Voice: A Survey of Clinical Fellows and Early Career Clinicians Specializing in Voice and Voice Disorders. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. 2021;6(5):1073-84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_PERSP-21-00115 59. Rumbach AF, Dallaston K, Hill AE. Student perceptions of factors that influence clinical competency in voice. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2021;23(2):124-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2020.1737733 60. OOAQ. Pourquoi consulter un orthophoniste? [internet]. n.d. cited 2023. Available from: https://www.ooaq.qc.ca/consulter/orthophoniste/pourquoi-consulter-orthophoniste/ |
| type_driver |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| type_coar |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1 |
| type_version |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| type_coarversion |
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 |
| type_content |
Text |
| publishDate |
2024-01-29 |
| date_accessioned |
2024-01-29T17:38:48Z |
| date_available |
2024-01-29T17:38:48Z |
| url |
https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/view/254 |
| url_doi |
https://doi.org/10.46634/riics.254 |
| eissn |
2665-2056 |
| doi |
10.46634/riics.254 |
| url4_str_mv |
https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/download/254/947 |
| url2_str_mv |
https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/download/254/946 |
| url3_str_mv |
https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/download/254/948 |
| _version_ |
1797159947588337664 |
| spelling |
Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec Resultados de una comunidad de práctica sobre las prácticas de evaluación de la voz y la identidad profesional de los logopedas de Quebec Artículo de revista comunidad de práctica práctica basada en evidencia identidad profesional evaluación vocal Patología del habla y del lenguaje En un contexto en el que existen diferentes protocolos para las prácticas recomendadas en la evaluación vocal clínica, y en el que se presentan vacíos en la literatura respecto a la base de evidencia que respalda los procedimientos y medidas de evaluación, los profesionales de regiones donde no hay una comunidad sólida con experiencia en prácticas vocales clínicas y científicas pueden enfrentar dificultades para desarrollar con confianza sus prácticas de evaluación vocal. Con el propósito de mejorar las prácticas de evaluación vocal y fortalecer la identidad profesional entre los logopedas de Quebec, Canadá, se estableció una comunidad de práctica (CdP). Esta tenía como objetivo fomentar el intercambio de conocimientos, implementar cambios en la práctica clínica y mejorar la identidad profesional. Un total de treinta y nueve participantes se involucraron en las actividades de la CdP, llevadas a cabo durante un período de cuatro meses, que incluyeron reuniones virtuales y talleres presenciales. Los participantes tuvieron una alta tasa de asistencia (> 74% de participación en las reuniones virtuales) y expresaron un alto grado de satisfacción con su participación, manifestando su intención de continuar involucrados después de la finalización del proyecto. Se observaron cambios estadísticamente significativos en las prácticas de evaluación vocal posterior a la CdP, en lo que respecta a la probabilidad de llevar a cabo evaluaciones (p < .001) y la percepción de la importancia de la evaluación con fines evaluativos (p < .001), así como mejoras en la confianza específica en la evaluación, particularmente en el procedimiento de evaluación auditivo-perceptual (p < .001) y el propósito de la evaluación aerodinámica (p = .05). Además, se registró un aumento en la identidad profesional posterior a la CdP (p < .001) y los participantes sintieron que obtuvieron aprendizajes significativos. El presente estudio destacó la necesidad de involucrar a los logopedas en investigaciones futuras, para identificar evaluaciones pertinentes a los objetivos evaluativos específicos de los logopedas que trabajan con la voz, y sugiere que las CdP son una herramienta eficiente con ese propósito. http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ART This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/view/254 Inglés https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud - 2024 Text http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1 http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Roy N, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Eadie T, Sivasankar MP, Mehta D, Paul D, et al. Evidence-Based Clinical Voice Assessment: A Systematic Review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2013;22(2):212-26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2012/12-0014) 2. Dejonckere PH, Bradley P, Clemente P, Cornut G, Crevier-Buchman L, Friedrich G, et al. A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2001;258(2):77-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004050000299 3. Behrman A. Common Practices of Voice Therapists in the Evaluation of Patients. Journal of Voice. 2005;19(3):454-69. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2004.08.004 4. Patel RR, Awan SN, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Courey M, Deliyski D, Eadie T, et al. Recommended Protocols for Instrumental Assessment of Voice: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Expert Panel to Develop a Protocol for Instrumental Assessment of Vocal Function. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018;27(3):887-905. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0009 5. Mattei A, Desuter G, Roux M, Lee BJ, Louges MA, Osipenko E, et al. International consensus (ICON) on basic voice assessment for unilateral vocal fold paralysis. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2018;135(1s):S11-s5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2017.12.007 6. Roy N. Assessment and treatment of musculoskeletal tension in hyperfunctional voice disorders. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2008;10(4):195-209. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17549500701885577 7. Estes CM, Johnson AM. Practical Considerations for Instrumental Acoustic and Aerodynamic Assessment of Voice: Discussion Points From an Open Forum of Clinicians. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. 2023;8(6):1354-62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_PERSP-23-00039 8. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312(7023):71-2. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 9. https://www.asha.org [Internet]. Rockville: ASHA AS-L-HA; 2023. Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) . Available from: https://www.asha.org/research/ebp/ 10. Speech-Language & Audiology Canada (SAC). Official Statement on Evidence-Based Speech-Language Pathology Practice in Schools [press release]. 22 june 2021. Available from: https://www.sac-oac.ca 11. Fitzgerald A. Professional identity: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum [Internet]. 2020;Apr 6;55(3):447–72. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12450 12. Holmes C, McDonald F, Jones M, Ozdemir V, Graham JE. Standardization and omics science: technical and social dimensions are inseparable and demand symmetrical study. Omics. 2010;14(3):327-32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/omi.2010.0022 13. Almklov PG, Rosness R, Størkersen K. When safety science meets the practitioners: Does safety science contribute to marginalization of practical knowledge? Safety Science. 2014;67:25-36. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.025 14. Arcand, L. La communauté de pratique un outil pertinent : résumé des connaissances adaptées au contexte de la santé publique, Institut national de santé publique du Québec. Canada. 2018. Available from: https://policycommons.net/artifacts/2052225/la-communaute-de-pratique-un-outil-pertinent/2805316/ 15. Lof GL. Science-based practice and the speech-language pathologist. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2011;13(3):189-96. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/17549507.2011.528801 16. Lemire N. Animer un processus de transfert des connaissances bilan des connaissances et outil d'animation / [auteures [...]. Montréal. 2009. 17. Li LC, Grimshaw JM, Nielsen C, Judd M, Coyte PC, Graham ID. Evolution of Wenger's concept of community of practice. Implementation Science. 2009;4(1):11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-11 18. https://www.asha.org [Internet]. Rockville: ASHA AS-L-HA; 2023. About Special Interest Group 3, Voice and Upper Airway Disorders [cited 2023 15th of July]. Available from: https://www.asha.org/sig/03/about-sig-3/ 19. Wenger E, McDermott R, Snyder W. Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School; 2002. 20. Renaud L, Caron Bouchard M, Gaudreault-Perron J, Gayraud H. Communauté de pratique dans le domaine de la promotion de la santé : analyse du sentiment d’appartenance et des pratiques de leadership. Communiquer Revue de communication sociale et publique. 2017;19:29-45. doi: https://doi.org/10.4000/communiquer.2147 21. Ranmuthugala G, Plumb JJ, Cunningham FC, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Braithwaite J. How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Services Research. 2011;11(1):273. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-273 22. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co; 1997.. 23. Holland K, Middleton L, Uys L. Professional confidence: A concept analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2012;19(2):214-24. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/11038128.2011.583939 24. Pasupathy R, Bogschutz RJ. An Investigation of Graduate Speech-Language Pathology Students' SLP Clinical Self-Efficacy. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders. 2013;40(Fall):151-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/cicsd_40_F_151 25. Tremblay D-G. Les communautés de pratique: quels sont les facteurs de succès. Revue internationale sur le travail et la société. 2005;3(2):692-722. 26. Mishra P, Pandey CM, Singh U, Gupta A, Sahu C, Keshri A. Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Ann Card Anaesth. 2019;22(1):67-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18 27. Pallant J. SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. London: McGraw-Hill Education; 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117445 28. Desjardins M, Halstead L, Cooke M, Bonilha HS. A Systematic Review of Voice Therapy: What “Effectiveness” Really Implies. Journal of Voice. 2017;31(3):392.e13-.e32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.10.002 29. Speyer R. Effects of voice therapy: a systematic review. Journal of Voice. 2008;22(5):565-80. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2006.10.005 30. Kenny C. Assessment practices of Irish speech and language therapists in the evaluation of voice disorders. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology. 2017;42(1):12-21. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/14015439.2015.1121291 31. McAlister S, Yanushevskaya I. Voice assessment practices of speech and language therapists in Ireland. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics. 2020;34(1-2):29-53. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2019.1610798 32. Patel RR, Ternström S. Quantitative and Qualitative Electroglottographic Wave Shape Differences in Children and Adults Using Voice Map-Based Analysis. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021;64(8):2977-95. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00717 33. Herbst CT. Electroglottography - An Update. J Voice. 2020;34(4):503-26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.12.014 34. Cheyne HA, Nuss RC, Hillman RE. Electroglottography in the pediatric population. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;125(10):1105-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.125.10.1105 35. Ramig LO, Dromey C. Aerodynamic mechanisms underlying treatment-related changes in vocal intensity in patients with Parkinson disease. J Speech Hear Res. 1996;39(4):798-807. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3904.798 36. Vaca M, Cobeta I, Mora E, Reyes P. Clinical Assessment of Glottal Insufficiency in Age-related Dysphonia. Journal of Voice. 2017;31(1):128.e1-.e5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.12.010 37. Mayes RW, Jackson-Menaldi C, DeJonckere PH, Moyer CA, Rubin AD. Laryngeal Electroglottography as a Predictor of Laryngeal Electromyography. Journal of Voice. 2008;22(6):756-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.03.005 38. Ramírez DAM, Jiménez VMV, López XH, Ysunza PA. Acoustic Analysis of Voice and Electroglottography in Patients With Laryngopharyngeal Reflux. Journal of Voice. 2018;32(3):281-4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.05.009 39. Albudoor N, Peña ED. Factors influencing US speech and language therapists’ use of technology for clinical practice. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. 2021;56(3):567-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12614 40. Oates J. Auditory-perceptual evaluation of disordered voice quality: pros, cons and future directions. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2009;61(1):49-56. doi: https://doi.org/10.1159/000200768 41. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR. Perceptual assessment of voice quality: Past, present, and future. Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders. 2010;20(2):62-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/vvd20.2.62 42. Barnett S, Jones SC, Bennett S, Iverson D, Bonney A. Perceptions of family physician trainees and trainers regarding the usefulness of a virtual community of practice. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(5):e92. doi: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2555 43. Barnett S, Jones SC, Caton T, Iverson D, Bennett S, Robinson L. Implementing a virtual community of practice for family physician training: a mixed-methods case study. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(3):e83. doi: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3083 44. Grol R, Wensing M. Implementation of Change in Healthcare. In: Wensing M, Grol R, Grimshaw J, editors. Improving Patient Care. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2020. p. 1-20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119488620.ch1 45. Mehta D, Hillman RE. Use of aerodynamic measures in clinical voice assessment. Perspectives on voice and voice disorders. 2007;17(3):14-8 doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/vvd17.3.14 46. Pillot-Loiseau C. Pression sous-glottique et débit oral d'air expiré comme aides à la pose du diagnostic de dysodie; implications pour la rééducation vocale. Entretiens d'orthophonie. 2011;32-45. Available from: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00609092/ 47. Lim KH, Ward LM, Benbasat I. An Empirical Study of Computer System Learning: Comparison of Co-Discovery and Self-Discovery Methods. Information Systems Research. 1997;8(3):254-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.8.3.254 48. Neufeld D, Fang Y, Wan Z. Community of Practice Behaviors and Individual Learning Outcomes. Group Decision and Negotiation. 2013;22(4):617-39. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-012-9284-8 49. Cook JM, O’Donnell C, Dinnen S, Coyne JC, Ruzek JI, Schnurr PP. Measurement of a model of implementation for health care: toward a testable theory. Implementation Science. 2012;7(1):1-15 doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-59 50. Hajian S. Transfer of learning and teaching: A review of transfer theories and effective instructional practices. IAFOR Journal of education. 2019;7(1):93-111. doi: https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.7.1.06 51. Correia AMR. Virtual communities of practice: Investigating motivations and constraints in the processes of knowledge creation and transfer. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management. 2010;8(1):11-20. Available from: https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejkm/article/view/885 52. Fahey R, Vasconcelos AC, Ellis D. The impact of rewards within communities of practice: a study of the SAP online global community. Knowledge Management Research & Practice. 2007;5(3):186-98. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500140 53. Ikioda F, Kendall S, Brooks F, De Liddo A, Buckingham Shum S. Factors That Influence Healthcare Professionals’ Online Interaction in a Virtual Community of Practice. Social Networking. 2013;02:174-84. doi: https://doi.org/10.4236/sn.2013.24017 54. McLoughlin C, Patel KD, O’Callaghan T, Reeves S. The use of virtual communities of practice to improve interprofessional collaboration and education: findings from an integrated review. Journal of interprofessional care. 2018;32(2):136-42 doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1377692 55. Jackson BN, Purdy SC, Cooper-Thomas HD. Role of Professional Confidence in the Development of Expert Allied Health Professionals: A Narrative Review. J Allied Health. 2019;48(3):226-32. Available from: https://tinyurl.com/yutyqxcp 56. Grimm P. Social Desirability Bias. In: Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2010. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444316568.wiem02057 57. van Mersbergen M, Ostrem J, Titze IR. Preparation of the speech-language pathologist specializing in voice: an educational survey. J Voice. 2001;15(2):237-50. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(01)00024-8 58. Procter T, Codino J, Rubin A. Finding Voice: A Survey of Clinical Fellows and Early Career Clinicians Specializing in Voice and Voice Disorders. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. 2021;6(5):1073-84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_PERSP-21-00115 59. Rumbach AF, Dallaston K, Hill AE. Student perceptions of factors that influence clinical competency in voice. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2021;23(2):124-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2020.1737733 60. OOAQ. Pourquoi consulter un orthophoniste? [internet]. n.d. cited 2023. Available from: https://www.ooaq.qc.ca/consulter/orthophoniste/pourquoi-consulter-orthophoniste/ info:eu-repo/semantics/article http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 Fundación Universitaria María Cano text/xml application/pdf text/html In a context where different protocols for recommended practices in clinical voice assessment exist, while there are gaps in the literature regarding the evidence base supporting assessment procedures and measures, clinicians from regions where a strong community holding expertise in clinical and scientific voice practices lack can struggle to confidently develop their voice assessment practices. In an effort to improve voice assessment practices and strengthen professional identity among speech-language pathologists in Quebec, Canada, a community of practice (CoP) was established, with the aim of promoting knowledge sharing, implementing change in clinical practice, and improving professional identity. Thirty-nine participants took part in the CoP activities conducted over a four-month period, including virtual meetings and in-person workshops. Participants had a high rate of attendance (> 74% participation rate in virtual meetings), and were highly satisfied with their participation and intended to remain involved after the project’s end. Statistically significant changes in voice assessment practices were observed post-CoP, regarding probability of performing assessments (p < .001), and perceived importance of assessment for evaluative purposes (p <.001), as well as improvements in assessment specific confidence, specifically for procedure of auditory-perceptual assessment (p < .001) and purpose of aerodynamic assessment (p = .05). Moreover, there was an increase in professional identity post-CoP (p < .001) and participants felt they made significant learnings. The present study highlighted the need to involve SLPs in future research to identify assessments that are relevant to the specific evaluative objectives of SLPs working with voice, and suggests CoPs are an efficient tool for that purpose. Verduyckt, Ingrid Defoy, Lyne Hocine, Imane Martel-Sauvageau, Vincent Speech language pathology voice assessment professional identity evidence-based practice Publication community of practice 6 1 Journal article https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/download/254/947 https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/download/254/946 2024-01-29T17:38:48Z https://doi.org/10.46634/riics.254 10.46634/riics.254 2024-01-29T17:38:48Z 2665-2056 2024-01-29 https://riics.info/index.php/RCMC/article/download/254/948 |