Advertisement

Augmentative and Alternative Communication Intervention for People With Angelman Syndrome: a Systematic Review

  • Laura RocheEmail author
  • Jeff Sigafoos
  • David Trembath
Hot Topic
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Angelman syndrome is often associated with severe communication impairment indicating the need for augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) intervention. The present review sought to identify and summarize intervention studies on the use of augmentative and alternative communication for people with Angelman syndrome.

Recent Findings

Recently, a specific communicative profile has been suggested for people with Angelman syndrome. To identify the usefulness of AAC to augment this profile, we conducted a systematic search of the literature. Nine studies were identified and summarized with respect to (a) participants, (b) communication mode, (c) design, (d) intervention procedures, (e) outcome measures, and main findings.

Summary

Overall, results from these studies suggest that AAC intervention is a viable approach for enhancing the communication skills of people with Angelman syndrome. However, additional research with larger samples is required to extend the evidence base supporting the use of AAC with people with Angelman syndrome.

Keywords

Angelman syndrome Augmentative and alternative communication Communication intervention Systematic review 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Bailus BJ, Segal DJ. The prospect of molecular therapy for Angelman syndrome and other monogenic neurologic disorders. BMC Neurosci. 2014;15:76.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-15-76.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mertz LGB, Christensen R, Vogel I, Hertz JM, Nielsen KB, Grønskov K, et al. Angelman syndrome in Denmark. Birth incidence, genetic findings, and age at diagnosis. Am J Med Genet. 2013;161:2197–203.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.36058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    • Clayton-Smith J, Laan L. Angelman syndrome: a review of the clinical and genetic aspects. J Med Genet. 2003;40:87–95.  https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.40.2.87Overview of the features of Angelman syndrome including a thorough description of the genetic mechanisms and the clinical manifestation. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    •• Knoll JH, Nicholls RD, Lalande M. On the parental origin of the deletion in Angelman syndrome. Hum Genet. 1989;83:205–6.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00286723Seminal work on the genetic cause of Angelman syndrome and the identification of the genetic mechanisms involved in Angelman syndrome. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Williams CA, Driscoll DJ, Dagli AI. Clinical and genetic aspects of Angelman syndrome. Genet Med. 2010;12:385–95.  https://doi.org/10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181def138.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lossie AC, Whitney MM, Amidon D, Dong HJ, Chen P, Theriaque D, et al. Distinct phenotypes distinguish the molecular classes of Angelman syndrome. J Med Genet. 2001;38:834–45.  https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.38.12.834.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mabb AM, Judson MC, Zylka MJ, Philpot BD. Angelman syndrome: insights into genomic imprinting and neurodevelopmental phentotypes. Trends Neurosci. 2011;34:293–303.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2011.04.001.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    • Didden R, Sigafoos J, Korzilius H, Baas A, Lancioni GE, O’Reilly MF, et al. Form and function of communicative behaviours in individuals with Angelman syndrome. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2009;22:526–37.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2009.00520.xCritical work identifying and describing the pre-linguistic communication behaviours seen in people with Angelman syndrome. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horsler K, Oliver C. The behavioural phenotype of Angelman syndrome. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2006;50:33–53.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00730.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    • Calculator SN. Parents’ reports of patterns of use and exposure to practices associated with AAC acceptance by individuals with Angelman syndrome. Augmentative Altern Commun. 2013;29:146–58.  https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2013.784804Critical work directly assessing parents perceptions of AAC use in individuals with Angelman syndrome. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    •• Pearson E, Wilde L, Heald M, Royston R, Oliver C. Communication in Angelman syndrome: a scoping review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2019:1266–74.  https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.14257Recent scoping review of studies focused on the communication profile of people with Angelman syndrome. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    •• Quinn ED, Rowland C. Exploring expressive communication skills in a cross-sectional sample of children and young adults with Angelman syndrome. Ame J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017;26:369–82.  https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_AJSLP-15-0075 Critical recent research focused on the expressive communication profile of young people with Angelman syndrome.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    •• Beukelman DR, Mirenda P. Augmentative and alternative communication: supporting children and adults with complex communication needs: Paul H. Brookes Pub.; 2013. Comprehensive resource for designing and implementing AAC interventions for people with complex communication needs. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    •• Jolleff N, Emmerson F, Ryan M, McConachie H. Communication skills in Angelman syndrome: matching phenotype to genotype. Adv Speech Lang Pathol. 2006;8:28–33.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14417040500459684Pivotal work linking the characteristics of Angelman syndrome to the genetic profile. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    • Radstaake M, Didden R, Oliver C, Allen D, & Curfs LM. Functional analysi and functional communication training in individuals with Angelman syndrome. Dev Neurorehabil, 2012:15:91–104. doi:  https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2011.651537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    • Radstaake M, Didden R, Lang R, O’Reilly M, Sigafoos J, Lancioni GE, et al. Functional analysis and functional communication training in the classroom for three children with Angelman syndrome. J Dev Phys Disabil. 2013;25:49–63.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-012-9302-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    • Martin JH, Reichle J, Dimian A, Chen M. Communication modality sampling for a toddler with Angelman syndrome. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools. 2013;44:327–36.  https://doi.org/10.1044/0161.1461(2013/12-0108).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    • van der Meer L, Didden R, Sutherland D, O’Reilly MF, Lancioni GE, Sigafoos J. Comparing three augmentative and alternative communication modes for children with developmental disabilities. J Dev Phys Disabil. 2012;24:451–68.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-012-9283-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    • Calculator SN. Use of enhanced natural gestures to foster interactions between children with Angelman syndrome and their parents. Ame J Speech Lang Pathol. 2002;11:340–55.  https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2002/039).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    • Calculator SN. Description and evaluation of a home-based, parent-administered program for teaching enhanced natural gestures to individuals with Angelman syndrome. Ame J Speech Lang Pathol. 2016;25:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_AJSLP-15-0017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    • Calculator S, Diaz-Caneja Sela P. Overview of the enhanced natural gestures instructional approach and illustration of its use with three students with Angelman syndrome. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2015;28:145–58.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12110.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    • Summers J, Szatmari P. Using discrete trial instruction to teach children with Angelman syndrome. Focus Autism Other Dev Disabil. 2009;24:216–26.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357609334057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    • Summers J. Neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with Angelman syndrome after 1 year of behavioral intervention. Dev Neurorehabil. 2012;15:239–52.  https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2012.676101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bondy A, Frost L. The picture exchange communication system. Focus Autistic Behav. 1994:91–19.  https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576940090301.
  25. 25.
    Reichle J, York J, Sigafoos J. Implementing augmentative and alternative communication: strategies for learners with severe disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.; 1991.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kiresuk TJ, Sherman RE. Goal attainment scaling: a general method for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs. Community Ment Health J. 1968;4:443–53.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01530764.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mullen E. Mullen scales of early learning. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service; 1995.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bzoch K, League R. Receptive-expressive emergent language scale. 2nd ed. Baltimore: University Park Press; 1991.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sparrow SS, Balla DA, Cicchetti DV. Vineland adaptive behavior scales. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service; 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationThe University of NewcastleNewcastleAustralia
  2. 2.School of EducationVictoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand
  3. 3.School of Allied Health SciencesGriffith UniversityGold CoastAustralia

Personalised recommendations