目的 研究影响儿童语言发育迟缓的原因,分析综合干预的有效性。方法 2017年9月-2018年3月选取18～35个月的语言发育迟缓儿童61例,同时选取年龄、性别相匹配的语言发育正常儿童55例为研究对象。将语言发育迟缓儿童分为两组,其中干预组31人,对照组30人。干预组给予综合干预,对照组仅给予家庭语言指导。采用《早期语言发育进程量表》进行语言筛查评估,由家长现场填写问卷的方式对家庭语言环境进行调查。结果 单因素分析发现父母亲生育年龄、住址、喂养方式、父母亲受教育程度、带养人与儿童互动时间以及每天接触电子产品时间与儿童语言问题相关(P＜0.05)。Logistic回归分析发现,带养人每天与孩子互动时间越长(2~4 h/d OR=0.542, 95%CI:0.352~0.866;≥4 h/d OR=0.211,95%CI:0.105~0.402)、母亲文化程度越高(高中 OR=0.685, 95%CI: 0.495~0.947; 大学及以上OR=0.468, 95%CI:0.157~0.785)和母乳喂养(OR=0.702, 95%CI:0.538~0.886)是语言发育迟缓的保护因素,接触电子产品≥1 h/d(OR=3.582,95%CI:2.314~5.761)则是语言发育迟缓的危险因素。训练3个月后,干预组与对照组各个能区差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05),两组语言A、B及总量表分数增加值差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。结论 儿童语言发育与家庭语言环境密切相关,综合干预对语言发育迟缓儿童的疗效更佳。
Abstract
Objective To investigate the influencing factors and effect of comprehensive intervention on developmental language delay in children. Methods A total of 61 children with developmental language delay aged 18-35 months were chosen and 55 normal children were matched by gender and age from September 2017 to March 2018.Children with developmental language delay were divided into two groups, with 31 children in comprehensive intervention group and 30 children in family language intervention group.Early Language Development Process Scale and Family Environment Questionnaire were used to access children′s language development level and home environmental factors. Results Parents′ child-bearing age, home address, feeding type, parents′ education level, time spending on electronic products each day were found relative with children′s language development problems(P<0.05).Logistic regression analysis showed that more-time to interact with children(2~4 h/d OR=0.542, 95%CI:0.352~0.866;≥4 h/d OR=0.211,95%CI:0.105~0.402), more-educated mothers(high school OR=0.685, 95%CI: 0.495~0.947; college and more-educated experience OR=0.468, 95%CI:0.157~0.785)and breast feeding(OR=0.702, 95%CI:0.538-0.886)were protective factors for developmental language delay, while spending on electronic products≥1 h/d(OR=3.582,95%CI:2.314-5.761)was a risk factor.There was significant statistical difference between the comprehensive intervention group and the control group after 3 months of intervention(P＜0.05). Conclusion Children′s language development is closely related to family language environment, and comprehensive intervention proves to be a better method to treat language delayin children.
关键词
儿童语言发育迟缓 /
家庭环境 /
影响因素 /
综合干预
Key words
developmental language delay in children /
family environment /
influencing factors /
comprehensive intervention
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 杜文威.语言发育迟缓儿童学龄前期的随访研究[D].重庆:重庆医科大学,2015.
[2] 罗美芳, 曹牧青, 郭翠华, 等.孤独症与语言发育迟缓儿童在年龄与发育进程问卷中的表现特征及差异[J].中国儿童保健杂志,2017,25(12):1200-1202.
[3] 刘锦, 焦喜涛, 胡中梅,等.儿童语言发育迟缓56例临床分析[J].内蒙古中医药,2004,23(5):31-31.
[4] 李国凯,刘桂华,钱沁芳,等.家庭养育环境对发育性语言障碍儿童语言发育和社会情绪的影响[J].中国当代儿科杂志,2017,19(5):555-559.
[5] 刘晓, 金星明, 章依文, 等.上海市婴幼儿语言发育常模研究[J].中华儿科杂志,2007,45(12):942-943.
[6] 倪晨曦, 何守森, 李安源.济南市城区部分婴儿前语言发育的纵向研究[J].中国儿童保健杂志,2010,18(4):304-306.
[7] 郑小斐, 陈津津.300例语言障碍儿童的智能发育水平分析[J].中国当代儿科杂志,2016,18(11):1115-1118.
[8] 邹园园, 张素卿, 黄师菊, 等.2～3岁儿童孤独症谱系障碍与发育性语言障碍的Gesell结果分析[J].中国儿童保健杂志,2015,23(3):298-300.
[9] 劳拉·E·贝克.儿童发展[M]//5版.吴颖,吴荣先,译.语言发展.南京:江苏教育出版社,2002:493-506.
[10] 刘敏娜,高雪婷,李元,等.0～4岁儿童语言发育现状及影响因素分析[J].中国儿童保健杂志,2016,24(9):978-980.
[11] Dworak M, Schierl T, Bruns T, et al.lmpact of singular excessive computer game and television exposure on sleep patterns and memory performance of school-aged children[J].Pediatrics,2007,120(5):978-985.
[12] Sansavini A, Guarini A, Alessandroni R, et al.Are early grammatical and phonological working memory abilities affected by preterm birth?[J].J Commun Disord,2007,40(3):239-256.
[13] 牛杰,陈永香,朱莉琪.早产儿语言发展的影响因素[J].中国当代儿科杂志,2012,14(1):76-80.
[14] 李国凯,葛品,刘桂华,等.幼儿语言障碍的环境影响因素研究[J].海峡预防医学杂志,2017,23(1):1-2+80.
[15] 陶聪, 麦坚凝, 肖华,等.2～3岁语言发育迟缓儿童的智能发育分析[J].中国儿童保健杂志,2012,20(7):635-636.
PDF(736 KB)
