Cerebral PalsyNCT04189159
Speech Motor Treatment in Cerebral Palsy
A study testing PROMPT in people with Cerebral Palsy and Dysarthria, run by IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris at 1 site in Italy.
Trial summary
Cerebral palsy (CP) is the most frequent cause of motor disability worldwide, with a prevalence of 2-2.5 per 1000 live births. Children with CP may experience a variety of difficulties with communication including speech. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 2 to 9 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Cerebral Palsy, Dysarthria
- What is being tested?
- PROMPT
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteItaly
- Study dates
- 1 Feb 2020to 31 Dec 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 2 to 9 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- child between 2 and 9 years with a diagnosis of CP, with normal to mild intellectual disability and adequate language comprehension skills
- motor speech deficit
Who cannot join
- utilization of AAC strategies as the only means of communication,
- medical fragility or anatomical malformations affecting speech production preventing the ability to participate in the intervention
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Italy1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris
Tirrenia, Tuscany, 56128
Giovanni Cioni, 050886233, gcioni@fsm.unipi.it
Giuseppina Sgandurra, gsgandurra@fsm.unipi.it
About this study
Official title: PROMPT to Improve Speech Motor Abilities in Children With Cerebral Palsy
Cerebral palsy (CP) is the most frequent cause of motor disability worldwide, with a prevalence of 2-2.5 per 1000 live births. Children with CP may experience a variety of difficulties with communication including speech. Communication impairment has been identified in at least 40% of children with CP, with 36-90% of CP children experiencing motor speech impairment.
The aims of the current project are to test the effectiveness of intensive PROMPT treatment in a group of preschool children with CP and motor speech disorders (dysarthria/apraxia of speech) and to evaluate differences to the intervention response according to CP type, brain lesion severity and white matter integrity of corticospinal tract. We hypothesize that children with CP and motor speech disorders will benefit from 3 weeks of daily administration of PROMPT treatment and show measurable improvement of speech intelligibility on clinical and kinematic assessments, with 3 months stability. Outcome measures will include a standardized speech motor assessment as well as improvement in kinematic speech measures detected by a computerized system. We also hypothesize that children with dyskynetic CP will show more improvement induced by the PROMPT treatment as compared to children with spastic CP. We finally hypothesize that corticospinal microstructural integrity positively impact on intelligibility recovery, with children with better integrity having bigger improvements.
Our study of PROMPT with children with varying types of CP meets current international priorities of testing and implementing effective, earlier interventions, therefore investing in the improvement infant's health based on evidence, as a future investment for individuals and the community.
Read the detailed description
- Rationale and purpose of research Cerebral palsy (CP) is the most frequent cause of motor disability worldwide, with a prevalence of 2-2.5 per 1000 live births. Several comorbidities characterize the clinical picture of children with CP, such as communication impairment, feeding difficulties, intellectual disability, vision and hearing impairment and epilepsy. Children with CP may experience a variety of difficulties with communication including speech, the development of gesture and facial expression, or receptive and expressive language, including voice production and intelligibility. Communication impairment has been identified in at least 40% of children with CP, with 36-90% of CP children experiencing motor speech impairment. Also, it has also been suggested that some children who do not present explicit dysarthria may have underlying speech motor control deficits. Intelligibility due to motor speech impairments affects activity and participation within various environments, reduces quality of life and increases daily care needs. Dysarthria may also be associated with excessive drooling and swallowing difficulties. Several studies consider compromised speech abilities as an indicator of the need for augmentative and alternative communication to supplement or replace communication. Conversely, CP and early acquired brain injury remain two of the most common medical causes of referral to speech and language therapy. However, little effort has been made in systematically improving speech motor abilities of children with CP by using early, reproducible and targeted intervention strategies. Furthermore, a poor relationship between the motor command and perceptual consequence of the speech movement has been hypothesized as a possible mechanism of speech dysfunction in CP, suggesting a potential therapeutic value of enhancing tactile-kinesthetic input to motor speech abilities of CP children.
- Review of literature There are few papers reporting trials on targeted standardized intervention for speech motor deficit in infants or children with CP, with little evidences on treatment effectiveness. In a small group of children aged 3-11 years, it has been suggested that the effect of a speech motor treatment was aligned with the core principles of dynamic systems theory such as PROMPT (Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets) in changing speech motor patterns of children with CP with proven benefits in intelligibility, documented by kinematic analyses. Several types of CP were included (dyskinetic, spastic unilateral and bilateral). In a group of 7 children with spastic quadriplegia, some outcome of a motor speech treatment originally developed for adults with Parkinson disease were validated, the Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT LOUD). They also showed changes in white matter integrity supporting behavioral changes.
- Research questions/Hypothesis Aim 1: To test the effectiveness of intensive PROMPT treatment in a group of preschool children with CP and motor speech disorders (dysarthria/apraxia of speech). Aim 2: To evaluate differences to the intervention response according to CP type, brain lesion severity and white matter integrity of corticospinal tract. Primary Hypothesis: children with CP and motor speech disorders will benefit from 3 weeks of daily administration of PROMPT treatment and show measurable improvement of speech intelligibility on clinical and kinematic assessments, with 3 months stability. Secondary hypotheses: children with dyskynetic CP will show more improvement induced by the PROMPT treatment as compared to children with spastic CP. Investigators also hypothesize that children with less severe brain lesions will have a higher level of improvement compared to children with more severe brain lesions. Investigators finally hypothesize that corticospinal microstructural integrity positively impact on intelligibility recovery, with children with better integrity having bigger improvements.
- Method Investigators plan a randomized trial of PROMPT in children with CP using a wait-list control group. Eligible children will be randomized into either immediate treatment or wait-list-control groups. This design allows every child meeting inclusion criteria to eventually receive the treatment and avoids issues of equipoise. For CP wait-listed controls, the study continues for 3 weeks longer and results into an additional assessment.
Because PROMPT has been shown to be beneficial in several older children with CP, investigators' rational for the design allows for achievement of the RCT data collection and analysis, as well as allow all identified and consented children to receive the intervention.
The participants will include children between 3 and 9 years of age, with a diagnosis of CP and speech motor disorders. Parents will be asked to consent for the children for the participation in the study. All study activities will be carried out in our clinical center setting with a PROMPT trained therapist with appropriate knowledge of clinical research process.
In investigators' studies of rehabilitation with the CP population consent to participate in studies approaches 90%. From investigators' experience and clinical demographics of the center, they were expected 30 patients diagnosed CP with speech difficulties in the requisite age group per year, making possible a design of staggered enrollment of intervention and wait-list-control groups in the RCT. Recruitment will be completed according to the standards of research consent, followed by group randomization, by a team member other than the treating therapist. The assessments will be completed by an experiences SLP, different from the treating therapist.
- Conditions
- Cerebral Palsy, Dysarthria
- Being tested
- PROMPT
- Keywords
- cerebral palsy, dysartria, motor speech treatment, prompt
- Medical subject headings
- Cerebral Palsy, Dysarthria
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PROMPTBehavioural
Also called motor speech treatment
PROMPT treatment is consistent with the principles of motor learning, in that every session includes a blocked pre-practice followed by variable and distributed practice and a gradual, hierarchical increase of complexity. Speech motor goals are integrated in goals for language and functional communication. During a PROMPT session tactile-kinesthetic-proprioceptive inputs are consistently provided, in order to shape speech movements, to give information on sequencing and timing and to introduce constraints for the reduction of degrees of freedom at the articulators' level in favour of motor control.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| PROMPT Treated | Experimental | PROMPT treatment, twice a day, for 5 days a week, for 3 consecutive weeks Receives: Behavioral: PROMPT |
| Control | No intervention | Usual treatment |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Verbal Motor Production Assessment for Children (VMPAC)
Standardized motor speech assessment, which includes 5 subscales, where higher scores mean better performance: Global motor control (range 20-0); Focal oromotor control (range 268-0); Sequencing (range 46-0); Connected speech and language (range 45-0); Speech Characteristics (range 7-0)
Measured: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
Phonetic Inventory
motor speech measure
Measured: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
the Intelligibility in Context Scale - Italian version
motor speech measure, range 1-5, where higher scores mean better performances
Measured: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
Viking Speech Scale (VSS)
Ordinal scale for intelligibility, range 1-4, with lower scores corresponding to better performances
Measured: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
Secondary outcomes (1)
kinematic speech motor measures
A kinematic analysis of facial movements during simple speech repetition tasks
Measured: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Dec 2019
- Study start1 Feb 2020
- Primary completion31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (26)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cerebral PalsyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- We plan a randomized trial using a wait-list control group.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Simona Fiori, IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris
- Investigators
- Simona Fiori, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, IRCCS Stella Maris Foundation
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04189159
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PROMPT-2019
- Other IDs
- 2019 Motor Speech Grant
- Status last verified
- May 2022
- First submitted
- 4 Dec 2019
- Last updated
- 20 May 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Whelan MA. Practice parameter: diagnostic assessment of the child with cerebral palsy: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society. Neurology. 2004 Nov 23;63(10):1985-6; author reply 1985-6. No abstract available.
PubMed 15568275Barty E, Caynes K, Johnston LM. Development and reliability of the Functional Communication Classification System for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016 Oct;58(10):1036-41. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.13124. Epub 2016 Apr 17.
PubMed 27087436Boliek CA, Fox CM. Therapeutic effects of intensive voice treatment (LSVT LOUD(R)) for children with spastic cerebral palsy and dysarthria: A phase I treatment validation study. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017 Dec;19(6):601-615. doi: 10.1080/17549507.2016.1221451. Epub 2016 Oct 5.
PubMed 27705010Bosanquet M, Copeland L, Ware R, Boyd R. A systematic review of tests to predict cerebral palsy in young children. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013 May;55(5):418-26. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12140.
PubMed 23574478Chen CY, Liu CY, Su WC, Huang SL, Lin KM. Factors associated with the diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders: a population-based longitudinal study. Pediatrics. 2007 Feb;119(2):e435-43. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-1477.
PubMed 17272605Cicchetti D. Neural plasticity, sensitive periods, and psychopathology. Dev Psychopathol. 2015 May;27(2):319-20. doi: 10.1017/S0954579415000012. No abstract available.
PubMed 25997757Cockerill H, Elbourne D, Allen E, Scrutton D, Will E, McNee A, Fairhurst C, Baird G. Speech, communication and use of augmentative communication in young people with cerebral palsy: the SH&PE population study. Child Care Health Dev. 2014 Mar;40(2):149-57. doi: 10.1111/cch.12066. Epub 2013 May 9.
PubMed 23656274Fiori S, Cioni G, Klingels K, Ortibus E, Van Gestel L, Rose S, Boyd RN, Feys H, Guzzetta A. Reliability of a novel, semi-quantitative scale for classification of structural brain magnetic resonance imaging in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2014 Sep;56(9):839-45. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12457. Epub 2014 Apr 19.
PubMed 24750109Fiori S, Guzzetta A. Plasticity following early-life brain injury: Insights from quantitative MRI. Semin Perinatol. 2015 Mar;39(2):141-6. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2015.01.007.
PubMed 25813668Hustad KC, Gorton K, Lee J. Classification of speech and language profiles in 4-year-old children with cerebral palsy: a prospective preliminary study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010 Dec;53(6):1496-513. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0176). Epub 2010 Jul 19.
PubMed 20643795Kennes J, Rosenbaum P, Hanna SE, Walter S, Russell D, Raina P, Bartlett D, Galuppi B. Health status of school-aged children with cerebral palsy: information from a population-based sample. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002 Apr;44(4):240-7. doi: 10.1017/s0012162201002018.
PubMed 11995892Liegeois F, Tournier JD, Pigdon L, Connelly A, Morgan AT. Corticobulbar tract changes as predictors of dysarthria in childhood brain injury. Neurology. 2013 Mar 5;80(10):926-32. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182840c6d. Epub 2013 Feb 6.
PubMed 23390172McLeod S, Harrison LJ, McCormack J. The intelligibility in Context Scale: validity and reliability of a subjective rating measure. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Apr;55(2):648-56. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0130). Epub 2012 Jan 3.
PubMed 22215036Mei C, Reilly S, Reddihough D, Mensah F, Pennington L, Morgan A. Language outcomes of children with cerebral palsy aged 5 years and 6 years: a population-based study. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016 Jun;58(6):605-11. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12957. Epub 2015 Nov 14.
PubMed 26566585Nordberg A, Miniscalco C, Lohmander A, Himmelmann K. Speech problems affect more than one in two children with cerebral palsy: Swedish population-based study. Acta Paediatr. 2013 Feb;102(2):161-6. doi: 10.1111/apa.12076. Epub 2012 Nov 27.
PubMed 23186066
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 May 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- PROMPT to Improve Speech Motor Abilities in Children With Cerebral Palsy
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04189159
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PROMPT-2019
- Conditions
- Cerebral Palsy, Dysarthria
- Keywords
- cerebral palsy, dysartria, motor speech treatment, prompt
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- IRCCS Fondazione Stella MarisUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Feb 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 Dec 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Cerebral palsy (CP) is the most frequent cause of motor disability worldwide, with a prevalence of 2-2.5 per 1000 live births. Children with CP may experience a variety of difficulties with communication including speech. Communication impairment has been identified in at least 40% of children with CP, with 36-90% of CP children experiencing motor speech impairment.
The aims of the current project are to test the effectiveness of intensive PROMPT treatment in a group of preschool children with CP and motor speech disorders (dysarthria/apraxia of speech) and to evaluate differences to the intervention response according to CP type, brain lesion severity and white matter integrity of corticospinal tract. We hypothesize that children with CP and motor speech disorders will benefit from 3 weeks of daily administration of PROMPT treatment and show measurable improvement of speech intelligibility on clinical and kinematic assessments, with 3 months stability. Outcome measures will include a standardized speech motor assessment as well as improvement in kinematic speech measures detected by a computerized system. We also hypothesize that children with dyskynetic CP will show more improvement induced by the PROMPT treatment as compared to children with spastic CP. We finally hypothesize that corticospinal microstructural integrity positively impact on intelligibility recovery, with children with better integrity having bigger improvements.
Our study of PROMPT with children with varying types of CP meets current international priorities of testing and implementing effective, earlier interventions, therefore investing in the improvement infant's health based on evidence, as a future investment for individuals and the community.
Detailed description
- Rationale and purpose of research Cerebral palsy (CP) is the most frequent cause of motor disability worldwide, with a prevalence of 2-2.5 per 1000 live births. Several comorbidities characterize the clinical picture of children with CP, such as communication impairment, feeding difficulties, intellectual disability, vision and hearing impairment and epilepsy. Children with CP may experience a variety of difficulties with communication including speech, the development of gesture and facial expression, or receptive and expressive language, including voice production and intelligibility. Communication impairment has been identified in at least 40% of children with CP, with 36-90% of CP children experiencing motor speech impairment. Also, it has also been suggested that some children who do not present explicit dysarthria may have underlying speech motor control deficits. Intelligibility due to motor speech impairments affects activity and participation within various environments, reduces quality of life and increases daily care needs. Dysarthria may also be associated with excessive drooling and swallowing difficulties. Several studies consider compromised speech abilities as an indicator of the need for augmentative and alternative communication to supplement or replace communication. Conversely, CP and early acquired brain injury remain two of the most common medical causes of referral to speech and language therapy. However, little effort has been made in systematically improving speech motor abilities of children with CP by using early, reproducible and targeted intervention strategies. Furthermore, a poor relationship between the motor command and perceptual consequence of the speech movement has been hypothesized as a possible mechanism of speech dysfunction in CP, suggesting a potential therapeutic value of enhancing tactile-kinesthetic input to motor speech abilities of CP children.
- Review of literature There are few papers reporting trials on targeted standardized intervention for speech motor deficit in infants or children with CP, with little evidences on treatment effectiveness. In a small group of children aged 3-11 years, it has been suggested that the effect of a speech motor treatment was aligned with the core principles of dynamic systems theory such as PROMPT (Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets) in changing speech motor patterns of children with CP with proven benefits in intelligibility, documented by kinematic analyses. Several types of CP were included (dyskinetic, spastic unilateral and bilateral). In a group of 7 children with spastic quadriplegia, some outcome of a motor speech treatment originally developed for adults with Parkinson disease were validated, the Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT LOUD). They also showed changes in white matter integrity supporting behavioral changes.
- Research questions/Hypothesis Aim 1: To test the effectiveness of intensive PROMPT treatment in a group of preschool children with CP and motor speech disorders (dysarthria/apraxia of speech). Aim 2: To evaluate differences to the intervention response according to CP type, brain lesion severity and white matter integrity of corticospinal tract. Primary Hypothesis: children with CP and motor speech disorders will benefit from 3 weeks of daily administration of PROMPT treatment and show measurable improvement of speech intelligibility on clinical and kinematic assessments, with 3 months stability. Secondary hypotheses: children with dyskynetic CP will show more improvement induced by the PROMPT treatment as compared to children with spastic CP. Investigators also hypothesize that children with less severe brain lesions will have a higher level of improvement compared to children with more severe brain lesions. Investigators finally hypothesize that corticospinal microstructural integrity positively impact on intelligibility recovery, with children with better integrity having bigger improvements.
- Method Investigators plan a randomized trial of PROMPT in children with CP using a wait-list control group. Eligible children will be randomized into either immediate treatment or wait-list-control groups. This design allows every child meeting inclusion criteria to eventually receive the treatment and avoids issues of equipoise. For CP wait-listed controls, the study continues for 3 weeks longer and results into an additional assessment.
Because PROMPT has been shown to be beneficial in several older children with CP, investigators' rational for the design allows for achievement of the RCT data collection and analysis, as well as allow all identified and consented children to receive the intervention.
The participants will include children between 3 and 9 years of age, with a diagnosis of CP and speech motor disorders. Parents will be asked to consent for the children for the participation in the study. All study activities will be carried out in our clinical center setting with a PROMPT trained therapist with appropriate knowledge of clinical research process.
In investigators' studies of rehabilitation with the CP population consent to participate in studies approaches 90%. From investigators' experience and clinical demographics of the center, they were expected 30 patients diagnosed CP with speech difficulties in the requisite age group per year, making possible a design of staggered enrollment of intervention and wait-list-control groups in the RCT. Recruitment will be completed according to the standards of research consent, followed by group randomization, by a team member other than the treating therapist. The assessments will be completed by an experiences SLP, different from the treating therapist.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- We plan a randomized trial using a wait-list control group.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| PROMPT Treated | Experimental | Behavioral: PROMPTPROMPT treatment, twice a day, for 5 days a week, for 3 consecutive weeks |
| Control | No intervention | –Usual treatment |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 2 to 9 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- child between 2 and 9 years with a diagnosis of CP, with normal to mild intellectual disability and adequate language comprehension skills
- motor speech deficit
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- utilization of AAC strategies as the only means of communication,
- medical fragility or anatomical malformations affecting speech production preventing the ability to participate in the intervention
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| PROMPTAlso: motor speech treatmentPROMPT treatment is consistent with the principles of motor learning, in that every session includes a blocked pre-practice followed by variable and distributed practice and a gradual, hierarchical increase of complexity. Speech motor goals are integrated in goals for language and functional communication. During a PROMPT session tactile-kinesthetic-proprioceptive inputs are consistently provided, in order to shape speech movements, to give information on sequencing and timing and to introduce constraints for the reduction of degrees of freedom at the articulators' level in favour of motor control. | Behavioural | PROMPT Treated |
Primary outcome
Verbal Motor Production Assessment for Children (VMPAC)
Time frame: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
Standardized motor speech assessment, which includes 5 subscales, where higher scores mean better performance: Global motor control (range 20-0); Focal oromotor control (range 268-0); Sequencing (range 46-0); Connected speech and language (range 45-0); Speech Characteristics (range 7-0)
Phonetic Inventory
Time frame: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
motor speech measure
the Intelligibility in Context Scale - Italian version
Time frame: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
motor speech measure, range 1-5, where higher scores mean better performances
Viking Speech Scale (VSS)
Time frame: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
Ordinal scale for intelligibility, range 1-4, with lower scores corresponding to better performances
1 secondary outcome
kinematic speech motor measures
Time frame: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 May 2022.
- Background: PubMed 15568275Whelan MA. Practice parameter: diagnostic assessment of the child with cerebral palsy: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society. Neurology. 2004 Nov 23;63(10):1985-6; author reply 1985-6. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 27087436Barty E, Caynes K, Johnston LM. Development and reliability of the Functional Communication Classification System for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016 Oct;58(10):1036-41. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.13124. Epub 2016 Apr 17.
- Background: PubMed 27705010Boliek CA, Fox CM. Therapeutic effects of intensive voice treatment (LSVT LOUD(R)) for children with spastic cerebral palsy and dysarthria: A phase I treatment validation study. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017 Dec;19(6):601-615. doi: 10.1080/17549507.2016.1221451. Epub 2016 Oct 5.
- Background: PubMed 23574478Bosanquet M, Copeland L, Ware R, Boyd R. A systematic review of tests to predict cerebral palsy in young children. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013 May;55(5):418-26. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12140.
- Background: PubMed 17272605Chen CY, Liu CY, Su WC, Huang SL, Lin KM. Factors associated with the diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders: a population-based longitudinal study. Pediatrics. 2007 Feb;119(2):e435-43. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-1477.
- Background: PubMed 25997757Cicchetti D. Neural plasticity, sensitive periods, and psychopathology. Dev Psychopathol. 2015 May;27(2):319-20. doi: 10.1017/S0954579415000012. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 23656274Cockerill H, Elbourne D, Allen E, Scrutton D, Will E, McNee A, Fairhurst C, Baird G. Speech, communication and use of augmentative communication in young people with cerebral palsy: the SH&PE population study. Child Care Health Dev. 2014 Mar;40(2):149-57. doi: 10.1111/cch.12066. Epub 2013 May 9.
- Background: PubMed 24750109Fiori S, Cioni G, Klingels K, Ortibus E, Van Gestel L, Rose S, Boyd RN, Feys H, Guzzetta A. Reliability of a novel, semi-quantitative scale for classification of structural brain magnetic resonance imaging in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2014 Sep;56(9):839-45. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12457. Epub 2014 Apr 19.
- Background: PubMed 25813668Fiori S, Guzzetta A. Plasticity following early-life brain injury: Insights from quantitative MRI. Semin Perinatol. 2015 Mar;39(2):141-6. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2015.01.007.
- Background: PubMed 20643795Hustad KC, Gorton K, Lee J. Classification of speech and language profiles in 4-year-old children with cerebral palsy: a prospective preliminary study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010 Dec;53(6):1496-513. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0176). Epub 2010 Jul 19.
- Background: PubMed 11995892Kennes J, Rosenbaum P, Hanna SE, Walter S, Russell D, Raina P, Bartlett D, Galuppi B. Health status of school-aged children with cerebral palsy: information from a population-based sample. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002 Apr;44(4):240-7. doi: 10.1017/s0012162201002018.
- Background: PubMed 23390172Liegeois F, Tournier JD, Pigdon L, Connelly A, Morgan AT. Corticobulbar tract changes as predictors of dysarthria in childhood brain injury. Neurology. 2013 Mar 5;80(10):926-32. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182840c6d. Epub 2013 Feb 6.
Related trials for Cerebral Palsy
Not yet recruiting
Feasibility of a Robot-Guided Active Play Intervention for Children With Cerebral Palsy
Cerebral Palsy
Recruiting
Additional Effects on tDCS With AOT on Lower Limb Functions on Children With Diplegic CP
Diplegic Cerebral Palsy
Recruiting
Sensory Integration Therapy vs Conventional Physical Therapy in Children With Mixed Cerebral Palsy
Cerebral Palsy
Active, not recruiting
Functional Outcomes and Control Using Synchron BCI - Australia
Neurologic Disorder, Neurologic Diseases
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Early Molecular Biomarkers for Differentiating Parkinsonian Syndromes
PARKINSON DISEASE (Disorder), Atypical Parkinsonism
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Simona Fiori, MD, PhD principal investigator
IRCCS Stella Maris Foundation
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing PROMPT in people with Cerebral Palsy and Dysarthria, run by IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris at 1 site in Italy.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 May 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Simona Fiori, MD, PhD (00393288170636, s.fiori@fsm.unipi.it), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Verbal Motor Production Assessment for Children (VMPAC) (time frame: after the end of treatment period (4 weeks from baseline)). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04189159, which also lists 26 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 May 2022.