Språkscreening med Westerlunds 3-årsmetod vid 2 ½ års ålder : En utvärdering med inriktning på tillägnandet av treordssatser

Sammanfattning: In 2015 a new national Child Health Care Program was introduced in Uppsala County, Sweden. Due to this, the Child Health Center’s speech-language screening for 3-year old’s was moved to 2½ years. The same method of screening - ‘Westerlunds 3-årsmetod’ - is maintained, though there have been a few changes. The children are only expected to use two-word utterances for a passable result, contrary to the earlier requirement for three-word utterances. The absence of three-word utterances now means a follow-up at the age of three. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the part in “Westerlunds 3-årsmetod” which examines length of utterances, by examining if the absence of three-word utterances could be used as an indicator for language difficulties and whether a postponement of the screening (with approximately a month) could ensue in fewer children being called for a follow-up. The participants were recruited through mail to families with children just above the age for the 2½ year speech-language screening. It proved difficult to find participants for the study with the chosen recruitment method and on that account an additional recruitment was implemented. Despite that, none of the possible participants met all the inclusion criteria in the end, which meant that the prospective analyses could not be performed and therefore the research questions could not be entirely answered. A choice was made to analyze the already collected data, meaning that the entire group of children screened in the right age range (2:6-2:9) were examined. The group consisted of 26 children, 14 girls and 12 boys. The average age was 2:6 years (min: 2:6, max: 2:8). Of these 8% (2 children) were not using three-word utterances, although they also had other difficulties. Based on this group vague indications could be seen suggesting that a connection between age and the time of screening does not exist. Most of the children, 95%, screened at the age of 2:6 years passed the screening without remarks. Furthermore, it turned out that some children were screened as early as 2:5 with passable results. Consequently, no data in this study supports the notion that a postponement of the screening would result in fewer follow-ups. It should be noted that due to insufficient data no clear conclusions can be drawn.