Nov 222011
 

Portions of this article were originally published in November 17, 2011 Issue of Advance Magazine for Speech Language Pathologists & Audiologists, Online Newsletter, under the title: “Orofacial Assessments: Pediatric Case Studies Illustrate Their Importance”

 Several months ago, I’ve administered speech-language testing to a 3-8 year old boy, adopted from Russia at the age of 3.  During the course of my assessment I noticed his atypical facial features.  He had a very small head, inward set eyes, and widely set ears.  At that time, even though this boy had already seen a number of other adoption professionals (including a neurologist, an occupational therapist and another speech language pathologist), I felt that it was very important to record my findings and refer the parent for a second opinion with a pediatrician specializing in working with internationally adopted children.  My rationale for seeking a second opinion for this child was further reinforced by a number of additional red flags, which included his significantly decreased play skills, severely impaired language ability, as well as significant social emotional and behavioral manifestations characterized by excessive impulsivity, distractibility, hyperactivity, decreased self-regulation, rapid over-stimulation, as well as anger outbursts and tantrums when others refused to follow his agenda and attempted to set limits on his behavior.

Subsequent, second opinion consultations for this child resulted in a diagnosis of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, a term which describes the range of physical, mental, behavioral, and learning disabilities that can occur in children whose prenatal history is remarkable for excessive maternal alcohol consumption.

I use this case to illustrate a point.  At the time of adoption this child presented with significant unrecognized deficits, which continued to persist unrecognized and unaddressed post adoption.  While I acknowledge that oftentimes little could be done done before a child is adopted, I also want to emphasize that this child could have been receiving relevant and necessary services for 8 months post adoption, but didn’t because his deficits were missed!

The above case is not an isolated occurrence by any means. As a speech language pathologist who works exclusively with various at-risk pediatric populations (including internationally adopted children), I have numerous clinical examples I can share with you. In the past I have encountered undiagnosed feeding and swallowing issues, submucous clefts, vocal webs, Cerebral Palsy, Wilson’s Syndrome, a number of undiagnosed Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder cases, and even several cases of severe infections due to excessive tooth decay and poor oral hygiene.   I can go on for a while but I do believe that I have sufficiently demonstrated my point.

Fact is that oftentimes internationally adopted children arrive to US with a host of undetected disorders and deficits.  Lack of detection is further increased in children adopted from economically developing countries or from hard to access insular regional orphanages, where they may fail to receive consistent and appropriate medical care, or where overcrowded conditions coupled with staff shortages may cause for deficits to be missed or unrecognized.

Consequently, oftentimes it is the parent(s) who are the first individuals to observe something different or unusual regarding their child’s facial features, oral structures, or any other appearance anomalies.

While many parents, of course, are not professionally trained in recognizing physical signs and symptoms of serious disorders, it is important to note that detection of unusual features is not as difficult as it sounds.

Here are some basic guidelines:

Does your child’s face look symmetrical or do you see any obvious signs of weakness (paralysis) on either side of the face (particularly evident when the child smiles and one side of the face droops or doesn’t move).

Do you find that your child’s features look odd or unusual in any way? Examples may include, but are not limited to: unusually wide or narrow set eyes, unusually set ears, virtual absence of a nose bridge, excessively thin upper lip, flatness of a groove above the lip, and so on (although with respect to facial appearance one needs to be very careful and account for differences in normal facial variation among various ethnic groups).

Do you notice any unusual spots, nodules, or openings on your child’s face or body or in his/her mouth?

In what condition is your child’s mouth? Is there excessive tooth decay? Do you see an unusual absence of teeth (in older children), or unusual bite (open bite, cross bite, etc)?  Is there excessive drooling?

Does your child have a usual voice or unusual cough in the absence of a documented illness?

If you do, then it would be a good reason to consult with a pediatrician specializing in international adoptions, to see whether your observations merit a referral to a specialist (e.g., neurologist, orthodontist, etc).

I realize of course that parents are not trained professionals, but they are observant individuals!  Moreover, there is a great likelihood that they are actually the first people to spend a prolonged period of time with the child.  There’s an even greater likelihood that they are the first people to actually “see” the child vs. the orphanage staff who may have fulfilled the child’s basic needs (feeding, diapering, etc) but who in reality may have actually spent very little face to face time with the child.

Furthermore, parents should not worry whether something that may see may not be a cause of concern.  What if it is and is not addressed?   That is why it is so important to share your concerns with relevant medical professionals.  It is up to them to investigate further whether your observations merit additional follow ups. If you are concerned, bring it up! You never know! You may paving the way to timely diagnosis and relevant intervention provision for your adopted child.

References:

  • Golper, L (2009) Medical Speech Language Pathology: A Desk Reference. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning
  • Shipley, K, & McAfee, J (2008) Assessment in Speech Language Pathology: A Resource Manual. 4th Ed. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning
Nov 012011
 

In recent years the percentage of “at-risk children” has been steadily increasing across pediatric speech-language pathology caseloads.  These include adopted and foster care children, medically fragile children (e.g., failure to thrive), abused and neglected children, children from low socioeconomic backgrounds or any children who for any reason lack the adequate support system to encourage them to function optimally socially, emotionally, intellectually, or physically.

At times speech-language pathologists encounter barriers when working with this population, which include low motivation, inconsistent knowledge retention, as well as halting or labored progress in therapy.

As a speech-language pathologist whose caseload consists entirely of at-children, I have spent countless of hours on attempting to enhance service delivery for my clients. One method that I have found to be highly effective for greater knowledge retention as well as for increasing the kids’ motivation is incorporating multisensory stimulation in speech and language activities.

To date, a number of studies have described the advantages of multisensory stimulation for various at risk populations. For example, in 2003 a study published in Journal of Research in Nursing and Health described the advantages of multisensory stimulation for 2 week old Korean orphans who received auditory, tactile, and visual stimulation twice a day, 5 days a week, for 4 weeks. This resulted in significantly fewer illnesses as well as significant gains in weight, length and head circumference, after the 4-week intervention period and at 6 months of age. Another 2009 study by White Traut and colleagues published in the Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing, found that multi sensory stimulation consisting of auditory, tactile, visual, and vestibular intervention contributed to a reduction of infant stress reactivity (steady decline in cortisol levels).   Moreover, multisensory stimulation is not just beneficial for young children. Other studies found benefits of multisensory stimulation for dementia (Milev et al, 2008) and coma patients (Doman & Wilkinson, 1993), indicating the usefulness of multisensory stimulation for a variety of at risk populations of different age groups.

After reviewing some studies and successfully implementing a number of strategies I wanted to share with you some of my favorite multisensory activities for different age-groups.

Before initiating any activities please remember to obtain parental permissions as well as a clearance from the occupational therapist (if the child is receiving related services), particularly if the child presents with significant sensory issues.  It is also very important to ensure that there are no food allergies, or nutritional restrictions, especially when it comes to working with new and unfamiliar clients on your caseload.

Multisensory stimulation for young children does not have to involve stimulation of all the senses at once. However, there are a number of activities which come quite close, especially when one combines “touch ‘n’ feel” books, musical puzzles as well as paper and edible crafts.

Here’s one of my favorite speech language therapy session activities for children 2-4 years of age. I use a board book called Percival Touch ‘n’ Feel Book to teach insect and animal related vocabulary words as well as talk about adjectives describing textures (furry, smooth, bumpy, sticky, etc).  As I help the children navigate the book, they get to touch the pages and talk about various plant and animals parts such as furry caterpillar dots, shiny flower petals, bumpy frog skin, or sticky spider web.   We also work on appropriately producing multisyllabic words and on combining the words into short sentences, depending of course, on the child’s age, skills, and abilities.   With this activity I often use animal and insect musical puzzles so the children can hear and then imitate select animal and insect noises.

Also, since all of Percival’s friends are garden insects and animals, it’s fairly easy to turn the book characters into paper crafts. Color paper templates are available from free websites such as www.dltk-kids.com, and range in complexity based on the child’s age (e.g., 2+, 3+ etc).  While looking innocuously like simple paper cutouts, in reality these crafts are a linguistic treasure trove and can be used for teaching simple and complex directions (e.g., after you glue the frog’s arm, glue on his foot) as well as prepositional concepts (e.g., glue the eyes on top of the head; glue the mouth below the nose, etc).

So far we have combined the tactile with the auditory and the visual but we are still missing the stimulation of a few other senses such as the olfactory and the gustatory.  For these we need a bit more creativity, and that’s where edible crafts come in (inspired by Janell Cannon’s ‘Crickwing’).  The child and I begin by constructing and gluing together a large paper flower and dabbing it’s petals with various food extracts (almond, vanilla, raspberry, lemon, root beer, banana, cherry, coconut, etc).  Then, using the paper flower as a model, we make an edible flower using various foods.  Pretzel sticks serve as stems, snap peas become leaves while mango, tomato, apple, peach and orange slices can serve as petals.  After our food craft is finished the child (and all other therapy participants) are encouraged to take it apart and eat it.  The edible flower is not just useful to stimulate the visual, tactile, gustatory, and olfactory senses but it also encourages picky eaters to trial new foods with a variety of textures and tastes, as well as serves to develop symbolic play and early abstract thinking skills.

It is also important to emphasize that multisensory activities are not just for younger children; they can be useful for school-age children as well (including middle school and high school aged kids). In the past, I have incorporated multisensory activities into thematic language and vocabulary units for older children (see resources below) while working on the topics such as the senses (e.g., edible tasting plate), nutrition (e.g., edible food pyramid), the human body (e.g., computer games such as whack a bone by anatomy arcade), or even biology (building plant and animal cell structures out of jello and candy). From my personal clinical experience I have noticed that when I utilized the multisensory approach to learning vs. auditory and visual approaches alone (such as paper based or computer based tasks only), the children evidenced greater task participation, were able to understand the material much faster and were still able to recall learned information appropriately several therapy sessions later.

I find multisensory stimulation to be a fun and interactive way to increase the child’s learning potential, decrease stress levels, as well as increase retention of relevant concepts.  Try it and let me know how it works for you!

 References:

·         Doman, G & Wilkinson, R (1993) The effects of intense multi-sensory stimulation on coma arousal and recovery. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation. 3 (2): 203-212.

·         Ti, K, Shin YH, & White-Traut, RC (2003), Multisensory intervention improves physical growth and illness rates in Korean orphaned newborn infants. Research in Nursing Health.  26 (6): 424-33.

·         Milev et al (2008) Multisensory Stimulation for Elderly With Dementia: A 24-Week Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Pilot Study. American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias. 23 (4): 372-376.

·         Tarullo, A & Gunnar, M (2006). Child Maltreatment and Developing HPA Axis. Hormones and Behavior 50, 632-639.

  • White Traut (1999) Developmental Intervention for Preterm Infants Diagnosed with Periventricular Leukomalacia. Research in Nursing Health.  22: 131-143.

·         White Traut et al (2009) Salivary Cortisol and Behavioral State Responses of Healthy Newborn Infants to Tactile-Only and Multisensory Interventions. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing. 38(1): 22–34

 Resources:

Oct 252011
 

October 25, 2011

My article on the topic of School Based Speech and Language Intervention for Internationally Adopted Children has been published in 154th Issue of the International Adoption Directory Newsletter.

Article Title: Understanding the extent of speech and language delays in older internationally adopted children: Implications for School Based Speech and Language Intervention

Article Summary: This article introduces options available to parents with regard to determining the extent of their child’s birth language delay at the time of adoption.   It refutes select myths regarding common school placements (e.g., ESL) for adopted children as well as reviews strategies of qualifying school age children with birth language delays for speech language services. The article reiterates the difference between communicative and cognitive language mastery of adopted children as well as cites select resources (e.g., letter template) available for parents who are requesting speech language services for their adopted child within the school system. 


 

Oct 212011
 

 

 

 

 

October 21, 2011: East Brunswick NJ

The Department of Children and Families and the New Jersey Task Force on Child Abuse and Neglect  had a  statewide child maltreatment prevention conference today and I had great fun doing today’s presentation:

Differential Diagnosis of Inattention, Hyperactivity and Impulsivity in At-Risk Children” with our clinical team, Alla Gordina, MD, FAAP and Lydia Shifrin, LCSW.

We had a terrific crowd, who asked great questions and gave excellent feedback.

Presentation Highlights:

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder is one of the most common and  the most controversial neurobehavioral disorders in children diagnosed today

Core symptoms of ADHD include  Inattention, Impulsivity and Hyperactivity

Some ADHD statistics:

  • Approximately 9.5% or 5.4 million children 4-17 years of age have ever been diagnosed with ADHD, as of 2007.
  • The percentage of children with a parent-reported ADHD diagnosis increased by 22% between 2003 and 2007.
  • Rates of ADHD diagnosis increased an average of 3% per year from 1997 to 2006 and an average of 5.5% per year from 2003 to 2007.
  • Boys (13.2%) were more likely than girls (5.6%) to have ever been diagnosed with ADHD.
  • The highest rates of parent-reported ADHD diagnosis were noted among children covered by Medicaid and multiracial children.

However,  numerous medical, psychiatric, neurological, psychological, speech-language and other disorders are frequently misdiagnosed as ADHD

NEARLY 1 MILLION CHILDREN ARE MISDIAGNOSED WITH ADHD

“Since ADHD is an underlying neurological problem where incidence rates should not change dramatically from one birth date to the next, these results suggest that age relative to peers in class, and the resulting differences in behavior, directly affects a child’s probability of being diagnosed with and treated for ADHD.”  (Elder, 2010). Journal of Health Economics

 

Disorders frequently misdiagnosed as AD/HD :

  • Respiratory Disorders (e.g., adenoid hypertrophy, asthma, allergic rhinitis)
  • Metabolic /Endocrine Disorders (e.g.,  diabetes, hypo/hyperthyroidism)
  • Hematological Disorders  (e.g., anemia)
  • Immunological Disorders (acquired and congenital immune problems)
  • Cardiac Disorders (e.g., congenital and acquired heart disease, syncopy)
  • Digestive  Disorders (e.g., irritable bowel syndrome, GERD, etc)
  • Neurological Disorders  (e.g., Traumatic Brain Injuries, Tumors, Encephalopathy, etc)
  • Sleep Disorders
  • Genetic Disorders (e.g., FASD, Fragile X Syndrome)
  • Toxin Exposure (e.g., Lead, Mercury, Drug Exposure)
  • Infections and Infestations (e.g., yeast overgrowth , intestinal worms/parasites)
  • Mental Health Disorders (e.g., anxiety, mood disorders, adjustment disorders)
  • Mental Retardation
  • Sensory Processing Disorders (vision, hearing, auditory, tactile)
  • Language Processing Disorders
  • Auditory processing Disorders

My presentation focused on explaining that having select language based difficulties can cause the child to act as inattentive, hyperactive and impulsive without actually having ADHD

My examples included:

  • Traumatic Brain Injury
  • Severe Language Delay
  • Auditory Processing Disorders
  • Social Pragmatic Language Deficits

Relevance and Implications for Adoption Professionals:

  • Multidisciplinary approach to identification, differential diagnosis, and management of disorders with “AD/HD” symptoms is NEEDED
  • One individual assessment (e.g.,  psychological) CANNOT reliably determine accurate diagnosis, especially when the diagnostic criteria is based on generalized symptomology
  • Refer adopted children with behavioral, listening, sensory, and any unusual deficits for multidisciplinary assessments which include in depth assessment of language abilities before making a conclusive diagnosis
  • Children who receive one assessment ONLY are at risk of misdiagnosis, misidentification, and are delayed in getting appropriate intervention services
Oct 172011
 

Boston MA- First conference of the Fall 2011 season:

October 17, 2011: Got to co-present with my favorite pediatrician (Alla Gordina, MD, FAAP) an interesting clinical case in front of American Academy Of Pediatrics: Council on Foster Care, Adoption and Kinship Care. Granted my part was via phone and connection wasn’t great but it so nice to see medical professionals being interested in ancillary professionals’ perspective on issues of internationally adopted children.

Presentation Title: A Case of Isolated Social Pragmatic Language Deficits in an Internationally Adopted Child

Presentation Highlights:

Language based deficits may affect internationally adopted children many years post adoption

Even children adopted at very young ages can present with subtle BUT significant delays in select areas of functioning (see below)

One such delay may be in the area of social pragmatic functioning  or the use of language

Select examples of social pragmatic deficits include:

  • Impaired ability to appropriately interpret social situations, events and contexts
  • Impaired ability to create and convey messages to different audiences (adults vs. children)
  • Impaired ability to interpret facial expressions, body language and gestures
  • Difficulty labeling and identifying basic emotions of self and others
  • Poor or absent perspective taking (understanding thoughts and feelings of others)
  • Inappropriate initiation of social interactions (e.g., not knowing how to start a conversation or appropriately interrupt a game)
  • Comprehension of age-level abstract and inferential information (stories, sarcasm, figurative language, etc)
  • Missing “the big picture” (integrating ideas into a whole, synthesizing and summarizing information)
  • Poor connection and relatedness to peers

Implications for Professionals:

Very easy to misdiagnose a child with social pragmatic deficits as someone with psychiatric disturbances (e.g., ADHD or Autism) without multidisciplinary differential diagnosis

“Low risk referrals” do carry a significant risk of deprivation-related issues, which can surface years after adoption

Internationally adopted children with behavioral, listening, sensory, and any unusual deficits need a differential  diagnosis (including assessment of language abilities before a conclusive diagnosis is made)