To explore individual speech-language pathologists’ (SLPs) experiences in the clinical practice of cleft palate speech/velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD), and to identify the need for and type of (further) training necessary.
Design
Descriptive and exploratory survey using QualtricsXM online platform, with subsequent in-person/Zoom Workplace platform interviews.
Setting
University research and clinical team
Participants
Members of the Hong Kong Association of Speech Therapists and the Macao Association of Speech Therapists
Interventions
The survey consisted of 39 items across 7 sections, for example, continuing professional development and assessment and treatment practices of cleft palate speech. Skip logic was applied to enhance survey efficiency and experience. Interviews were conducted in various modes.
Main Outcome Measure(s)
The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) was used. Quantitative measures include proportions and percentages; qualitative data were summarized from the survey and subsequent interviews.
Results
90% reported receiving teaching in cleft palate speech/VPD ranging from 0 to 96 h (M = 12.7, SD = 15.58). Over half of respondents felt not (very) confident when undertaking assessment (61%) and treatment (54%). Lack of exposure to real clients was a key reason for low confidence levels. Almost all respondents expressed a strong need for continuing professional development in the area.
Conclusions
Study findings highlight the need for further training in cleft palate speech/VPD for SLPs in the region and emphasize the importance of continuing professional development to enhance skills and confidence in assessment and treatment, ultimately improving care and outcomes for individuals with cleft palate with or without lip.
BrittonLAlberyLBowdenMHarding-BellAPhippenGLTSellD. A cross-sectional cohort study of speech in five-year-olds with cleft palate ± lip to Support Development of National Audit Standards. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2014;51(4):431-451. doi:10.1597/13-121
2.
KlintöKBrunnegårdKHavstamCAppelqvistMHagbergETalemanA-SLohmanderA. Speech in 5-year-olds born with unilateral cleft lip and palate: A prospective Swedish intercenter study. J Plast Surg Hand Surg.2019;53(5):309-315. doi:10.1080/2000656x.2019.1615929
3.
LohmanderAPerssonCWilladsenELundeborgIAlaluusuaSAuknerRBauABoersMBowdenMDaviesJ, et al.Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 4. Speech outcomes in 5-year-olds- velopharyngeal competency and hypernasality. J Plast Surg Hand Surg.2017;51(1):27-37. doi:10.1080/2000656X.2016.1254645
4.
SellD. Issues in perceptual speech analysis in cleft palate and related disorders: A review. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2005;40(2):103-121. doi: 10.1080/13682820400016522
5.
PereiraVJSellD. How differences in anatomy and physiology and other aetiology affect the way we label and describe speech in individuals with cleft lip and palate. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024;59(6):2181-2196. doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12946
6.
Peterson-FalzoneSJHardin-JonesMAKarnellMP. Cleft Palate Speech. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2009.
7.
ZajacDJVallinoLD. Evaluation and Management of Cleft Lip and Palate. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2017.
8.
SellDPereiraV. Speech: Perceptual and functional outcomes. In: LoseeJKirsnerR, eds. Comprehensive Cleft Care. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group; 2016:689-713.
9.
JohnASellDSweeneyTHarding-BellAWilliamsA. The cleft audit protocol for speech—Augmented: A validated and reliable measure for auditing cleft speech. Cleft Palate Craniofacial J. 2006;43(3):272-288. doi:10.1597/04-141.1
10.
LohmanderALundeborgIPerssonC. SVANTE - The Swedish Articulation and Nasality Test - Normative data and a minimum standard set for cross-linguistic comparison. Clin Linguist Phon. 2017;31(2):137-154. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2016.1205666
11.
SellDJohnAHarding-BellASweeneyTHegartyFFreemanJ. Cleft audit protocol for speech (CAPS-A): A comprehensive training package for speech analysis. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2009;44(4):529-548. doi:10.1080/13682820802196815
12.
ChapmanKLBaylisATrost-CardamoneJCorderoKNDixonADobbelsteynCThurmesAWilsonKHarding-BellASweeneyT, et al.The Americleft Speech Project: A training and reliability study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(1):93-108. doi:10.1597/14-027
13.
AlighieriCBettensKBruneelLD'haeseleerEVan GaeverEVan LierdeK. Effectiveness of speech intervention in patients with a cleft palate: Comparison of motor-phonetic versus linguistic-phonological speech approaches. J Speech Lang Hear Res.2020;63(12):3909-3933. doi:10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00129
14.
PereiraVJSoJYTTsangJMKChoiWSTongMCFLeeKYS. Speech Telepractice and Treatment intensity in a Cantonese-speaking case with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome following late diagnosis and management of velopharyngeal dysfunction. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2023;60(11):1505-1512. doi:10.1177/10556656221106042
15.
HanleyLBallardKJDicksonAPurcellA. Speech intervention for children with cleft palate using principles of motor learning. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2023;32(1):169-189. doi:10.1044/2022_AJSLP-22-00007
16.
AlighieriCAllemeerschFVandewieleFVan LierdeK. Treating non-oral compensatory misarticulations in children with a cleft palate: A randomized controlled trial on the effect of combined phonetic–phonological intervention. J Speech Lang Hear Res.2025;68(8):3823-3842. 10.1044/2025_JSLHR-24-00800
17.
AndersenHSJørgensenLDWilstrupCWilladsenE. Multiple oppositions intervention: Effective phonological treatment of two children with cleft lip and palate and severe speech sound disorder. Clin Linguist Phon. 2025;39(1):57-78. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2024.2339308
18.
PereiraV. Clinical research. In: RuscelloDVallinoL, eds. Cleft Palate Speech Intervention across the Lifespan. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing Inc.; 2025:283-304. In press.
19.
BedwinekAPKummerAWRiceGBGramesLM. Current training and continuing education needs of preschool and school-based speech-language pathologists regarding children with cleft lip/palate. Lang Speech Hear Ser. 2010;41(4):405-415. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2009/09-0021)
20.
GhabrialEBütowKWOlorunjuSAS. South African speech-language therapists’ opinion of their training in cleft lip and palate and craniofacial deformities. S Afr J Commun Disord. 2020;67(1):e1-e6. doi:10.4102/SAJCD.V67I1.695
21.
AlighieriCBettensKVerhaegheSVan LierdeK. From excitement to self-doubt and insecurity: Speech–language pathologists’ perceptions and experiences when treating children with a cleft palate. Int J Lang Comm Dis. 2021;56(4):739-753. doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12624
22.
WilliamsCHardingSWrenY. An exploratory study of speech and language therapy intervention for children born with cleft palate ± lip. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2021;58(4):455-469. doi:10.1177/1055665620954734
23.
Hardin-JonesMJonesDLDolezalRC. Opinions of speech-language pathologists regarding speech management for children with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020;57(1):55-64. doi:10.1177/1055665619857000
24.
LauF. Methods for survey studies. In: LauFKuziemskyC, eds. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-Based Approach. University of Victoria; 2017, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK481602/ (accessed 28 January 2025).
The Speech Pathology Association of Australia Limited. Competency based occupational standards for speech pathologists – Entry level. Speech Pathology Australia. 2023.
29.
PeterPCW. Editorial. The Hong Kong Medical Diary. 2018; 23(2): 2
EysenbachG. Improving the quality of web surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(3):e34. doi:10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34
35.
CheungPSPNgKHToC. The Hong Kong Cantonese Articulation Test. Hong Kong: Language Information Sciences Research Centre and City University of Hong Kong; 2006.
36.
SoLKH. Cantonese Segmental Phonology Test [Kit]. Hong Kong: Bradford Publishing Company; 1993.
37.
SoLKHLeungC-SS. A phonological screening tool for Cantonese-speaking children. Child Lang Teach Ther.2004;20(1):75-86. 10.1191/0265659004ct264oa
38.
GoldmanRFristoeM. GFTA-3: Goldman Fristoe 3 Test of Articulation. PsychCorp, an imprint of Pearson Clinical Assessment, 2015.
39.
SellDHardingAGrunwellP. GOS.SP.ASS.'98: An assessment for speech disorders associated with cleft palate and/or velopharyngeal dysfunction (revised). Int J Lang Commun Disord.1999;34(1):17-33. doi:10.1080/136828299247595
40.
WilliamsAL. Multiple oppositions: Theoretical foundations for an alternative contrastive intervention approach. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2000;9(4):282-288. 10.1044/1058-0360.0904.282
41.
DoddBHolmACrosbieSMcIntoshB. A core vocabulary approach for management of inconsistent speech disorder. Adv Speech Lang Pathol. 2006;8(3):220-230. 10.1080/14417040600738177
42.
HodsonBWPadenEE. Targeting Intelligible Speech: A Phonological Approach to Remediation. Worthing, England: College-Hill Press; 1983.
43.
GierutJA. Maximal opposition approach to phonological treatment. J Speech Hear Disord. 1989;54(1):9-19. doi:10.1044/jshd.5401.09
44.
StackhouseJWellsB. Children’s Speech and Literacy Difficulties: A Psycholinguistic Framework. London, UK: Wiley; 1997.
45.
DeanECHowellJWatersDReidJ. Metaphon: A metalinguistic approach to the treatment of phonological disorder in children. Clin Linguist Phon.1995;9(1):1-19. 10.3109/02699209508985318
Van RiperCGEricksonRL. Speech Correction: An Introduction to Speech Pathology and Audiology. 9th ed. San Diego, CA: Pearson; 1995.
48.
SandAHagbergELohmanderA. On the benefits of speech-language therapy for individuals born with cleft palate: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2022;65(2):555-573. doi:10.1044/2021_JSLHR-21-00367
49.
NagdeeNSebothomaBMadahanaMKhoza-ShangaseKMoroeN. Simulations as a mode of clinical training in healthcare professions: A scoping review to guide planning in speech-language pathology and audiology during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. S Afr J Commun Disord.2022;69(2):e1-e13. 10.4102/sajcd.v69i2.905
50.
OrmerodEMitchellC. Evaluation of a pilot to introduce simulated learning activities to support speech and language therapy students’ clinical development. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024;59(1):369-378. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12953
51.
GentileFWankeMMuellerWHochuliE. Virtual reality in speech therapy students’ training: A scoping review. Virtual Worlds. 2025;4(3):37. 10.3390/virtualworlds4030037
52.
PereiraVChengEYuWYiuYChoiCChanSChoiWLeungMSellD. Reliability and validity of the PACS-C (Perceptual Assessment of Cleft Palate Speech-Cantonese) Tool. In: Paper presented at: 15th International Congress of Cleft Palate/Lip and Related Craniofacial Anomalies; October 20‒24, 2025; Kyoto Japan.
53.
ChengEPereiraVYuWYiuYChoiCChanSSellDChoiW. The Construction and Validation of the Perceptual Assessment of Cleft Speech- Cantonese (PACS-C) for use in Hong Kong and Macau. In: Paper presented at: 15th international congress of cleft palate/lip and related craniofacial anomalies; October 20‒24, 2025; Kyoto Japan.
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.
