Most people consider a lot of options when they seek to enhance their fluency.   Since studies repeatedly show stuttering can be caused by many factors, (including genetics and environment), enhancing fluency often requires trying several tactics from several disciplines before finding the right combination that works.
               
At Janus Development Group we recommend combining the use of your SpeechEasy device with therapy from a licensed SLP, which helps increase the chances of developing an individualized, systematic and effective approach to fluency.
               
Below are three case studies, each one different, each one provided by a different SLP, sharing the effects of SpeechEasy in a person’s life.  If you are considering purchasing a SpeechEasy device, we hope these case studies will help enlighten you about what some of our clients’ experience.  If you already have a device, and would like your SLP to submit your story, please contact your SLP directly.  If you would like to share your story via a testimonial, please click here: www.speecheasy.com/testimonials_story.php

We would like to thank Bonnie McKenzie, M.S., CCC-SLP, from McKenzie Center for Speech & Language, St. Louis, Missouri; Connie Dugan, M.A., CCC-SLP, ASHA Board Recognized Fluency Specialist, Chicago, Illinois; and Cliff Goldman, M.S., CCC-SLP, ASHA Board Recognized Fluency Specialist, Portland, Oregon, for their case study contributions.

Case Study 1

Situation

The client is a 24-year-old female employed as a substitute teacher.

Prior to obtaining the SpeechEasy device, the client reported difficulty speaking on the phone, talking to authority figures, and during job interviews. The client also reported heightened speech fear and anxiety in these situations. Silent blocks and repetitions were observed at presentation.

Results

The client experienced the following immediate results with SpeechEasy:

Stuttered Syllables

• Conversation

Without SpeechEasy, 15; with SpeechEasy, 1 to 4

• Reading

Without SpeechEasy, 5; with SpeechEasy, 0

This providing SLP demonstrated techniques to assist the client in smoothing out speech, initiating words more easily, and enhancing speech naturalness. During initial months of SpeechEasy use, the client rated her speech an “8” on a scale of 0 to 10, with “0” indicating “No Improvement” and “10” indicating “No Stuttering Whatsoever.”  Following one year of SpeechEasy use and ongoing therapy, the client rated her speech a “9” and indicated improvements in confidence in situations previously perceived as difficult. The client reports being able to wear the SpeechEasy device less – while still maintaining control of her fluency.

Case Study 2

Situation

The client, J., is a 12-year-old youth.  His development was normal in every way except for speech, which was somewhat delayed.  At the age of 2.5 years, his speech “caught up,” except that he exhibited the beginnings of stuttering and articulation difficulty with /k/ and /g/.   By the age four his stuttering became less typical and he demonstrated pitch changes, hard blocks, and word avoidance.  J. has received therapy since age four and has been treated by a highly experienced and well regarded fluency specialist for most of this time.  The young man, his parents, and his speech-language pathologist agree that he has made significant progress, yet he still cannot manage his speech as well as he would like.

The client is an excellent student.  He is proactive about taking part in special school activities such as science fairs. The client presented as mature for his age, articulate, and quietly engaging.  He voiced positive attitudes about his speech and appears highly motivated to continue to improve his fluency.  It was noted that he has very good eye contact even when he blocks.  The family unit appeared to be exceptionally strong and supportive.

Results

During the fitting we settled on a setting prescription of 60 ms delay and an upward frequency shift of 500 Hz.  J.’s speech was rated using a modification of the Stuttering Severity Instrument.  See the chart below for a comparison of his fluency without and with the SpeechEasy:

Stuttering events were mostly single component, though in the baseline condition he demonstrated several more complicated blocks including 3 repetitions of an initial sound + prolongation.

J. had no physical concomitants other than facial tension in either condition.

The quality of stuttering moments in the monologue condition is summarized below.

Baseline: 
Interjection – 30%                tense pause – 25%                   phoneme repetition – 20%         
phrase repetition – 5%         prolongation – 20%

Wearing SpeechEasy:
tense pause – 75%              prolongation – 20%

The client was coached in using active techniques to enhance the benefit of the SpeechEasy; specifically, he was shown how to focus on stretching the first vowel to consonant or consonant to vowel transition in a phrase.  This was emphasized because of his success and experience with Easy Relaxed Approach, Smooth Movement (ERASM) which was a tool practiced in his therapy program.

The client was interviewed by telephone approximately 22 months after receiving his device.  He stated that he wears the SpeechEasy and “some of the time” at school.  He does not like to wear it in the cafeteria, for example, because of noise.  He stated that he particularly likes to use it for presentations.  He stated the major benefit of the device is that it reminds him to use techniques learned in therapy and makes it easier for him to do so.  He has won several science fair competitions.  He did not have his device for one of these as it was in the lab for repair.  His mother stated that he took care to remember he was capable of doing well for his presentation with or without his SpeechEasy. 
                                                                 

Case Study 3

Situation

The client is a 41-year-old male who is pastor of a church. He has always been fluent when preaching, but can stutter severely in conversation.  He has had speech therapy which included fluency shaping techniques for breath control, tight articulatory contacts, rhythmic intonation as well as modification techniques such as cancellation. I found the speech therapy helpful, but very difficult to apply in his everyday speaking activities.

The client contacted this providing SLP for an evaluation and was considered an excellent candidate for the SpeechEasy. He was extremely motivated, intelligent and had the previous speech therapy.

Results

Stuttering frequency before trying the SpeechEasy was 28.5 per cent of stuttered
syllables. Duration of the longest block was 4 seconds.  Stuttering frequency with the SpeechEasy was essentially fluent.   Any stuttering was characterized as fleeting.  His rate of speech was somewhat slower than his normal fluent speech, but within normal limits.

Follow up

Seven months after the client received his device he called and said the device was not working as well as when he started using it.  We corresponded via email, and then had a phone consultation. What the pastor was doing is what I call the ‘flight to fluency.’ As a user of the device, I’ve done it myself. His speech had become very fast, characterized by vocal fry-like vocalization, but tense and hurried. One of the fluency enhancing techniques, the “ah,” had become ‘squeezed’ and quickened in the attempt to avoid stuttering. The operative word is AVOID. With some coaching he was able to resume his former fluency. Now when he feels himself speeding up, or running from stuttering (fluency or bust), per my suggestion he stops or cancels, gets a sense of the quiet, silence, calm, and then reintroduces fluency enhancing techniques, rather than trying to ‘run from the stuttering.’  I actively paired the pausing and his sense of that with his belief system.