ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07526246Updated Sep 18, 2026

Motor-based Intervention for Childhood Apraxia of Speech: DTTC-Connect

An interventional study of Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing - Connect (DTTC-Connect) in Childhood Apraxia of Speech, sponsored by New York University. Recruiting at 2 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 3 Years to 12 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-18.

Sponsored by New York University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
68
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
3 Years to 12 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) is a complex motor speech disorder that significantly limits a child's ability to communicate in daily activities, with difficulties often persisting into adolescence and adulthood. There is solid evidence that motor-based interventions, such as Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing (DTTC), improve word production in children with CAS. Building on this strong foundation, the next critical step is to extend this work to support functional communication in connected speech, where children with CAS often continue to struggle. There is a critical need for a systematic bridge within the context of treatment from word-level practice to connected speech, as robust word-level gains often fail to generalize to other speaking contexts. This work addresses this gap by transitioning children from word- to phrase-level practice using Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing-Connect (DTTC-Connect), a novel, structured adaptation of DTTC that targets connected speech production. Our approach builds on established DTTC principles while incorporating progression to more complex utterances, offering a developmentally appropriate, research-informed pathway to functional communication.

This study is a Phase II randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to examine the efficacy of DTTC-Connect, a motor-based treatment that includes phrase-level practice to refine connected speech and support communicative participation for children with CAS. The overall objectives of this work are to test the efficacy of DTTC-Connect and document changes in speech motor control at the connected speech level in 68 children with CAS (3;6 - 12;11 years of age) who receive treatment twice a week for 8 weeks (16 sessions). The central hypothesis is that DTTC-Connect will lead to lasting improvements in phrase accuracy, speech intelligibility and speech motor control, ultimately enhancing a child's communicative participation.

Read the detailed description

The long-term goal of this research is to provide evidence-based treatment guidelines to enhance speech intelligibility and therefore, communicative participation, for children with childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). The overall objectives are to test the efficacy of Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing-Connect (DTTC-Connect) and document changes in speech motor control at the connected speech level, when intervention is provided two times per week for eight weeks. The central hypothesis is that DTTC-Connect will lead to lasting improvements in phrase accuracy, speech intelligibility, and speech motor control, ultimately enhancing a child's communicative participation, as supported by our previous Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing (DTTC) research and pilot data on DTTC-Connect. The following aims are examined:

Aim 1: Quantify the effects of DTTC-Connect on connected speech accuracy and whether previous DTTC modifies response to DTTC-Connect. 68 children with CAS will receive 8 weeks of DTTC-Connect, with a subset of children returning from the prior DTTC randomized controlled trial (RCT). The working hypothesis is that untreated phrase accuracy (primary outcome) and speech intelligibility (secondary outcome) will increase pre-post DTTC-Connect with gains maintained at 8 weeks post-treatment in all children. It is hypothesized that prior DTTC RCT performance (returning participants) will predict untreated phrase accuracy pre-post DTTC-Connect. Linear mixed-effects models will be used to estimate the DTTC-Connect treatment effect and the moderation effect of prior DTTC exposure.

Aim 2: Quantify the effects of DTTC-Connect on speech motor variability and whether previous DTTC modifies response to DTTC-Connect.

Acoustic and kinematic (lip/jaw movement) data will be obtained pre- and post- DTTC-Connect from 68 children with CAS, including a subset of children returning from the prior DTTC RCT. The working hypothesis is that variability (secondary outcome) will be reduced in all children following DTTC-Connect, with changes maintained at 8 weeks post-treatment. Inclusion of returning children will allow the examination of extended treatment on speech motor control. It is hypothesized that the change in variability in the prior DTTC RCT will moderate the treatment effect with DTTC-Connect. Linear mixed-effects models will be used to estimate changes in variability over time as in Aim 1.

Aim 3: Evaluate the effect of DTTC-Connect on communicative participation in children with CAS. Communicative participation (secondary outcome) will be assessed in all children pre- and post- DTTC-Connect. The working hypothesis is that children with CAS who receive DTTC-Connect will show meaningful gains in their attitudes about speaking and in caregiver-reported functional communication. Linear mixed-effects models will be used to estimate changes in communicative participation following DTTC-Connect.

Upon completion of these aims, the expected outcome is to establish the efficacy of DTTC-Connect in a large cohort of children with CAS, while uncovering how previous response to word-level DTTC informs individualized treatment planning. In doing so, it will generate actionable insights to enhance clinical outcomes while also deepening theoretical understanding of speech motor learning in CAS.

02

Conditions studied

  • Childhood Apraxia of Speech

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Pediatric Motor Speech Disorder
  • Speech Motor Control
  • Communicative Participation
03

In context

Apraxias

65 studies on the registry are indexed under Apraxias; 21 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 68 is above the median of 32 across 50 interventional studies indexed under Apraxias.

Browse Apraxias studies →

Lead sponsor

New York University is the lead sponsor of 123 studies on the registry; 32 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
3 Years to 12 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Diagnosis of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). The diagnosis will be made by two speech language pathologists (SLPs) who have extensive experience in the differential diagnosis of CAS.
  2. Age between 3;6 and 12;11 years.
  3. Normal structure of the oral-peripheral mechanism as determined by a motor speech examination using established lab protocol.
  4. Participants must pass a hearing screening conducted at 20 dB SPL at 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz.
  5. Not receiving speech treatment elsewhere over the course of this study, although language, augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) treatment, or similar non-speech treatment, would be permitted.
  6. Language Testing: Receptive Language Index standard score greater than or equal to 70 on the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals - Preschool 3rd edition (CELF-P3) for children 3;6-5;11 years of age, or the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals - 5th edition (CELF-5) for children 6;0-12;11 years of age.
  7. Nonverbal Cognition Testing: Standard score greater than or equal to 70 on the Developmental Assessment of Young Children-2nd edition (DAYC-2) for children 3;6- 5;11 years of age, or the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales- 2nd edition, Remote (RIAS) for children 6;0-12;11 years old.
  8. Can imitate 2-3 word phrases.
  9. English as the primary language.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Primary dysarthria diagnosis, even if CAS is a secondary diagnosis.
  2. Abnormal structure of the oral peripheral mechanism.
  3. Fluency disorder, even if the child meets criteria for CAS.
  4. Conductive or sensorineural hearing loss, even if the child meets criteria for CAS.
  5. Does not imitate 2-3 word phrases.
  6. English is not the primary language.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
68 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Immediate Treatment

    Participants in the Immediate Treatment Group will receive Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing-Connect (DTTC-Connect) Treatment two times per week (45-minute sessions each) for 8 weeks. Total duration will be 90 minutes/week over 16 sessions. Treatment will begin following the diagnostic evaluation.

    Behavioral: Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing - Connect (DTTC-Connect)

  • Experimental
    Delayed Treatment

    The Delayed Treatment Group serves as a control during the period in which participants are waiting to begin treatment. A delayed treatment onset is employed to control for maturation effects. Participants in the Delayed Treatment Group will receive Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing-Connect (DTTC-Connect) Treatment two times per week (45-minute sessions each) for 8 weeks. Total duration will be 90 minutes/week over 16 sessions. Treatment will begin after an 8-week delay following the diagnostic evaluation.

    Behavioral: Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing - Connect (DTTC-Connect)

Interventions

  • BehavioralDynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing - Connect (DTTC-Connect)

    DTTC-Connect is a motor-based intervention designed to improve speech accuracy in children with CAS by targeting movement transitions within phrases. Treatment begins with selecting a target phrase identified through dynamic assessment as being within the child's optimal challenge point. Using this initial target, four additional phrases are constructed that systematically build in structural, phonetic, and grammatical complexity to support gradual progression in motor skill. Treatment begins with two-word phrases and follows the first three levels of the DTTC temporal hierarchy: Simultaneous Production → Direct Imitation → Delayed Imitation. The final step is Elicited Production where children produce the target at random intervals in the absence of a prior model. Aligned with standard DTTC, children initially receive maximal support during Simultaneous Production. As accuracy improves, support is faded and the child progresses to less supported levels of production.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Phrase Accuracy

    The primary outcome measure will be untreated phrase accuracy, quantified using the adapted Multilevel word Accuracy Composite Score (MACS) ratings for phrase-level stimuli. This composite score reflects the accuracy of four key areas: (I) segments (consonant \& vowel accuracy within-word and across-word boundaries); (II) phrase structure (maintenance of structures across the phrase); (III) movement transitions (smoothness and fluency across sounds, syllable, or words); and (IV) prosody (lexical \& phrasal stress). Each component receives a binary rating (0/1). Ratings will consider co-articulatory effects that naturally occur between words within connected speech.

    Time frame: Immediate Group: Pre-Treatment Baseline; 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-week Post-Treatment; 16-weeks Post-Treatment; Delayed Group: Pre-Delay Baseline; Pre-Treatment Baseline (8-weeks post Pre-Delay Baseline); 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-weeks Post-Treatment;

Secondary outcomes

  1. Speech Intelligibility

    Speech intelligibility will be assessed to evaluate how well a listener understands a child's connected speech. To elicit naturalistic yet structured speech, children will be audio-recorded while narrating a short story depicting a picture card series using the School-Aged Language Assessment Measures (SLAM). Ten representative utterances per child per time point will be selected, randomized, and presented to five naïve adult listeners for transcription. A mean intelligibility score will be derived from the percentage of words correctly transcribed. This method captures connected speech in a developmentally appropriate and controlled format while supporting consistency and ecological validity.

    Time frame: Immediate Group: Pre-Treatment Baseline; 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-week Post-Treatment; 16-weeks Post-Treatment; Delayed Group: Pre-Delay Baseline; Pre-Treatment Baseline (8-weeks post Pre-Delay Baseline); 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-weeks Post-Treatment;

  2. Variability

    Acoustic variability will be quantified using the coefficient of variation from phrase duration. Kinematic variability will be measured using jaw and lip aperture Spatiotemporal Index (STI) values. To ensure reliable estimates, each session must yield a minimum of four analyzable productions per target, with a maximum of eight to balance representation across children with differing levels of speech accuracy.

    Time frame: Immediate Group: Pre-Treatment Baseline; 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-week Post-Treatment; 16-weeks Post-Treatment; Delayed Group: Pre-Delay Baseline; Pre-Treatment Baseline (8-weeks post Pre-Delay Baseline); 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-weeks Post-Treatment;

  3. Communicative Participation

    The treating SLP will administer the Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS-34) and the Intelligibility in Context Scale (ICS) to caregivers, who can complete these measures in person while their child receives treatment. If the caregiver is not present, the forms will be sent electronically, and the clinician will schedule a brief Zoom meeting to provide instructions. Completed forms can then be returned electronically. To examine children's feelings towards speech, the Communication Attitude Test (CAT) will be administered to children age six years and older and the KiddyCAT Communication Attitude Test for Preschool and Kindergarten Children Who Stutter (KiddyCAT) will be administered to children under 6 years of age.

    Time frame: Immediate Group: Pre-Treatment Baseline; 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-week Post-Treatment; 16-weeks Post-Treatment; Delayed Group: Pre-Delay Baseline; Pre-Treatment Baseline (8-weeks post Pre-Delay Baseline); 1-week Post-Treatment; 8-weeks Post-Treatment;

07

Study locations

2 of 2 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2015). Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales, Second Edition (RIAS-2), and Reynolds Intellectual Screening Test, Second Edition (RIST-2). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  • Voress, J. K., & Maddox, T. (2013). Developmental Assessment of Young Children (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
  • Vanryckeghem, M. and G.J. Brutten, KiddyCAT: Communication attitude test for preschool and kindergarten children who stutter. 2007: Plural Publishing Incorporated San Diego, CA.
  • Strand, E.A., R. Stoeckel, and B. Baas, Treatment of severe childhood apraxia of speech: A treatment efficacy study. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 2006. 14(4): p. 297-308.
  • Strand, E.A. and P. Debertine, The efficacy of integral stimulation intervention with developmental apraxia of speech. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 2000. 8(4): p. 295-300.
  • Maas E, Farinella KA. Random versus blocked practice in treatment for childhood apraxia of speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Apr;55(2):561-78. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2011/11-0120). Epub 2011 Dec 29. PubMed 22207698 ↗
  • Maas E, Butalla CE, Farinella KA. Feedback frequency in treatment for childhood apraxia of speech. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Aug;21(3):239-57. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0119). Epub 2012 Mar 21. PubMed 22442284 ↗
  • Case J, Wang EW, Grigos MI. The Multilevel Word Accuracy Composite Scale: A Novel Measure of Speech Production in Childhood Apraxia of Speech. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2023 Aug 17;32(4S):1866-1883. doi: 10.1044/2023_AJSLP-22-00166. Epub 2023 May 17. PubMed 37195724 ↗
  • Hustad KC, Allison KM, Sakash A, McFadd E, Broman AT, Rathouz PJ. Longitudinal development of communication in children with cerebral palsy between 24 and 53 months: Predicting speech outcomes. Dev Neurorehabil. 2017 Aug;20(6):323-330. doi: 10.1080/17518423.2016.1239135. Epub 2016 Oct 28. PubMed 27792399 ↗
  • Wiig, E. H., Secord, W. A., & Semel, E. M. (2020). Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Preschool 3 (CELF-Preschool 3). Pearson.
  • Wiig, E.H., W.A. Secord, and E. Semel, Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals: CELF-5. 2013: Pearson.
  • Crowley, C., & Baigorri, M. (2014). School-age Language Assessment Measures: SLAM dog comes home cards.
  • Zaretsky E, Velleman SL, Curro K. Through the magnifying glass: Underlying literacy deficits and remediation potential in childhood apraxia of speech. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2010 Feb;12(1):58-68. doi: 10.3109/17549500903216720. PubMed 20380250 ↗
  • Thomas-Stonell NL, Oddson B, Robertson B, Rosenbaum PL. Development of the FOCUS (Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six), a communication outcome measure for preschool children. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010 Jan;52(1):47-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03410.x. Epub 2009 Aug 26. PubMed 19709136 ↗
  • Teverovsky EG, Bickel JO, Feldman HM. Functional characteristics of children diagnosed with Childhood Apraxia of Speech. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(2):94-102. doi: 10.1080/09638280701795030. PubMed 18720114 ↗
  • Strand EA. Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing: A Treatment Strategy for Childhood Apraxia of Speech. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2020 Feb 7;29(1):30-48. doi: 10.1044/2019_AJSLP-19-0005. Epub 2019 Dec 17. PubMed 31846588 ↗
  • Smith A, Goffman L, Zelaznik HN, Ying G, McGillem C. Spatiotemporal stability and patterning of speech movement sequences. Exp Brain Res. 1995;104(3):493-501. doi: 10.1007/BF00231983. PubMed 7589300 ↗
  • McLeod S, Harrison LJ, McCormack J. The intelligibility in Context Scale: validity and reliability of a subjective rating measure. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Apr;55(2):648-56. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0130). Epub 2012 Jan 3. PubMed 22215036 ↗
  • Maas E, Gildersleeve-Neumann C, Jakielski K, Kovacs N, Stoeckel R, Vradelis H, Welsh M. Bang for Your Buck: A Single-Case Experimental Design Study of Practice Amount and Distribution in Treatment for Childhood Apraxia of Speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Sep 20;62(9):3160-3182. doi: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-S-18-0212. Epub 2019 Aug 19. PubMed 31425660 ↗
  • Lewis BA, Freebairn LA, Hansen AJ, Iyengar SK, Taylor HG. School-age follow-up of children with childhood apraxia of speech. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2004 Apr;35(2):122-40. doi: 10.1044/0161-1461(2004/014). PubMed 15191325 ↗
  • Grigos MI, Moss A, Lu Y. Oral Articulatory Control in Childhood Apraxia of Speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2015 Aug;58(4):1103-18. doi: 10.1044/2015_JSLHR-S-13-0221. PubMed 25951237 ↗
  • Grigos MI, Case J, Lu Y, Lyu Z. Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing: Quantifying Speech Motor Changes and Individual Factors That Contribute to Treatment Gains in Childhood Apraxia of Speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2024 Sep 26;67(9S):3359-3376. doi: 10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00658. Epub 2023 Jun 28. PubMed 37379241 ↗
  • Grigos MI, Case J, Lu Y, Lyu Z. Dynamic Temporal and Tactile Cueing in Young Children With Childhood Apraxia of Speech: A Multiple Single-Case Design. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2024 Apr 8;67(4):1042-1071. doi: 10.1044/2024_JSLHR-23-00415. Epub 2024 Mar 21. PubMed 38512002 ↗
  • Brutten, E. J., & Vanryckeghem, M. (2007). BAB: Behavior Assessment Battery for school-age children who stutter. Plural Publishing.
  • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2007). Childhood apraxia of speech [Technical Report] [Technical Report]. www.asha.org/policy

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Individual participant data tied to the primary and secondary outcome measures will be shared after de-identification on Open Science Framework (OSF).

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form

Time frame: Beginning 6 months following publication. No end date.

Access criteria: Researchers and speech language pathologists who provide a methodologically sound proposal. Proposals should be directed to maria.grigos@nyu.edu. To gain access, data requestors will need to complete and sign a data sharing agreement.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Start is estimated for Sep 2026; primary completion for Sep 2030, 47 months later.

Of 30 interventional studies with no phase under Apraxias, half reached primary completion within 53 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 21 and three quarters within 59. This study's planned 47 months is below that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Apr 2, 2026
First posted
Apr 13, 2026
StartEst.
Sep 15, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Sep 1, 2030
CompletionEst.
Mar 31, 2031
Last update
Sep 18, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 18, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07526246
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Apr 13, 2026
Start date
Sep 15, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 1, 2030 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 31, 2031 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 18, 2026

Study contacts

Maria I Grigos, PhD
Contact
maria.grigos@nyu.edu
212.998.5230
Julie Case, PhD
Contact
julie.case@hofstra.edu
Maria I. Grigos, PhD
principal investigator · New York University
Julie Case, PhD
principal investigator · Hofstra University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion