Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

Inom den svenska barnhälsovården ska språkscreening genomföras vid 2,5–3 års ålder. Utifrån utfall på språkscreening erbjuds vidare insatser utifrån riktlinjer som återfinns i Rikshandboken i barnhälsovård. Syftet med studien var att studera hur många barn som utifrån språkscreeningen på barnavårdscentralen (BVC) vid 2,5–3 års ålder har ett språkscreeningresultat med avvikelse, om dessa barn remitteras samt om det finns regionala skillnader eller skillnader mellan olika språkscreeningmetoder. Syftet med studien var också att undersöka i vilken ålder barn remitteras till logoped i samband med besök på BVC utifrån region och språkscreeningsmetod. För att besvara studiens syfte utformades fem frågeställningar. Studiens data hämtades från kvalitetsregistret Svenska barnhälsovårdsregistret (BHVQ) med data registrerad från besök på BVC. Den data som användes kom från fem regioner och det var totalt 28 906 deltagare.

Studiens resultat påvisade skillnader mellan regionerna och språkscreeningsmetoderna inom några av studiens frågeställningar. Det framkom inga tydliga skillnader vad gäller ålder vid språkscreening. Däremot fanns det en tydlig skillnad utifrån andelen barn som språkscreenas, vilket skulle kunna förklaras med journalförningsbrister. Det fanns en tydlig skillnad i andelen barn som remitterades till logoped i samband med språkscreeningen. Mellan regionerna fanns det tydliga skillnader i remittering och icke remittering vid positivt utfall på språkscreeningen, dessa skillnader sågs inte mellan språkscreeningsmetoderna. Det fanns skillnader i ålder för remittering till logoped från BVC. Det framkom således att de metoder och riktlinjer som fanns inte efterföljdes i full utsträckning i de regioner som innefattades av studien. Det fanns faktorer i studiens data, såsom skillnader i antalet deltagare i olika regioner och journalföringsbrister, som gjorde att resultaten till viss del behöver betraktas med försiktighet och fortsatta studier behövs för att kunna dra större slutsatser utifrån studiens resultat.

Within Swedish child health care, language screening should be carried out at the age of 2.5–3 years. Based on the outcome of the language screening, further interventions are offered based on guidelines found in the National Child Health Handbook. The purpose of the study was to investigate how many children, based on the language screening at the Child health center (CHC) at the age of 2.5–3 years, have a language screening result with deviation, if these children are referred and if there are regional differences or differences between different language screening methods. The purpose of the study is also to investigate at what age children are referred to a speech language pathologist in connection with visits to CHC based on region and language screening method. To answer the purpose of the study, five questions were formulated. The study's data were taken from the quality register Swedish Child Health Care Register (BHVQ) with data registered from visits to a CHC. The data used came from five regions and there were a total of 28,906 participants.

The study's results showed differences between the regions and the language screening methods within some of the study's questions. There were no distinct differences in terms of the age at language screening. However, there was a clear difference based on the percentage of children who participate in a language screening, which could be explained by insufficiencies in the keeping of the medical records. There was a distinct difference in the proportion of children who were referred to a speech language pathologist in connection with the language screening. Between the regions there were distinct differences in remittance and non-remittance in case of a positive outcome on the language screening, these differences were not seen between the language screening methods. There were differences in age for referral to a speech language pathologist from the CHC. It thus emerged that the methods and guidelines that existed were not followed to the full extent in the regions included in the study. There were factors in the study's data, such as differences in the number of participants in different regions and record-keeping deficiencies, which affected the results to some extent, and they need to be viewed with caution. Further studies are needed to be able to draw larger conclusions based on the study's results.