Methods
Study
design
A cross-sectional online survey was employed. The survey consisted of
multi-choice items, with an open-ended section for participants to add
responses that were not listed in the presented options.
Participants
An invitation email was sent to the members of Malaysian Association of
Speech and Hearing and Malaysian Speech-Language Therapist Association.
Participants received background and explanation about the study through
the email. An online link of the survey was extended to potential
participants who replied to the invitation email and indicated their
involvement in aphasia management. All participants met the following
inclusion criteria: (a) having a qualification to practice as an SLP in
Malaysia and (b) being involved in clinical management of aphasia during
data collection period. Participants were requested to provided online
consent before completing an online questionnaire.
Materials
An online questionnaire was developed for the study based on previous
studies that focus on SLP practices (Joginder Singh et al . 2011;
Mustaffa Kamal et al . 2012; Simmons et al . 2003; Tayloret al . 2009). Three SLPs who primarily focus their clinical work
on aphasia management were involved as panel experts for evaluation face
and content validity, as well as overall presentation of the survey.
Based on their recommendation, we included additional questions and
modified sentence structure and item sequence. The questionnaire
consisted of three sections as shown in Table 1.
[Table 1]
Data analyses
Percentages were obtained for categorical data in all sections of the
questionnaire. For Section II, percentages were calculated based on
Likert scale points. Five points on the Likert scale were recategorized
into three levels of frequency: “Never” for the first point, “Less
Frequent” for the second and third points, and “More Frequent” for
the fourth and fifth points. Three levels of consistency (Highly
Consistent, Moderately Consistent, and Inconsistent) were also
determined for each level of frequency of assessment activities. A
specific aspect or activity was considered to be Highly Consistent (HC)
when at least 80% of participants agree on considering an aspect or
conducting an activity at the same frequency level. An agreement level
of 50-79% on a specific aspect or activity was considered to be
Moderately Consistent (MC). Inconsistent (IC) level was considered for
an agreement level that was less than 50% (Trochim and Donelly 2007,
Mustaffa Kamal et al . 2012). In addition, nine types of
challenges were presented to participants. The proportions of
participants who reportedly have been facing specified challenges were
calculated.