Comparison of in-person versus teletherapy mode of articulation therapy for correction of errors in stop consonants in children with repaired cleft lip and palate

Background: Articulation therapy for children with cleft lip and palate (CLP) can be delivered in-person, remotely via teletherapy, or through a hybrid delivery model. However, the most effective mode remains unclear. The present study aims to compare the effectiveness of articulation therapy delivered via in-person versus teletherapy by analyzing Cleft-type errors (CTEs) and percentage of consonants correct – revised (PCC-R) across four time points in Kannada-speaking children with repaired cleft lip and palate (RCLP). Methods: Fourteen children aged between 4 and 10 years participated and were equally divided into two groups. A time-series research design was employed to compare the production of stop consonants across four time points between two groups. The stop consonants were selected from the Kannada Diagnostic Photo Articulation Test for periodic assessment. Group I ( n = 7) received in-person therapy. Group II ( n = 7) received teletherapy via the Zoom platform. Both groups underwent 30 sessions of articulation therapy, conducted by investigators for 4 days a week, with each session lasting 40 minutes. The outcome measures, including CTEs and PCC-R, were compared at four time points across groups. Results: The overall reduction of CTEs, conversely an increase in PCC-R scores across four time points. The results of the Mann–Whitney U -test revealed no statistically significant difference in PCC-R between groups across four time points. Conclusion: The current study supports the notion that in-person articulation therapy and teletherapy are equally effective for children with RCLP.