Now more than ever, speech clinicians are being required to justify the effectiveness of their work by showing results. There are different ways to measure outcomes. For example, outcomes may be measured by testing to determine if change has occurred regarding clinical goals, or by comparing the cost of the treatment to the benefit of the treatment to determine if the treatment was economically sound. Another type of measure is subjective outcomes, such as client satisfaction. Subjective outcomes are difficult to define and measure and few studies of this type have been reported in the literature. Because clinical outcome is dependent, at least to some extent, on client satisfaction (Williams, 1994), and because few studies have been reported in the literature regarding client satisfaction with speech and language services, this area became the focus of the current study. This study sought to answer the following questions: (a) Did the parents think their child benefrtted from the articulation intervention services received at the clinic? and (b) What were parents' attitudes regarding the clinical atmosphere and staff? The Consumer Satisfaction Measure of the American SpeechLanguage- Hearing Association (ASHA) was used in this study because it is broad in scope and contains statements relating to the research questions of the current study. Answers to the research questions were derived from the responses to the survey that was mailed to the parents of 86 children who had received articulation services from the PSU Speech and Hearing Clinic. Ninety-five percent of the parental responses regarding whether parents felt that their children benefited from services obtained at the PSU Speech and Hearing Clinic were positive, indicating that parents were satisfied with the services received. Ninety-one percent of the parental responses regarding parent's attitudes toward the clinical atmosphere and staff were positive. It appears that parents hold favorable views regarding the clinical atmosphere and staff and that they were satisfied with the services their children received at the PSU Speech and Hearing Clinic.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the survey as a method of assessing client satisfaction with clinical services and to then assess parental satisfaction of clinical services at Portland State University's language clinic using the survey method. The survey asked questions regarding the parents' perceived benefits from the clinic, their perception of the skills of the clinicians who served their children, and the parents' perception of the clinical atmosphere. Eighty-five Consumer Satisfaction Surveys were mailed to 81 parents of children receiving services at Portland State University Speech-Language Clinic between the years 1987 and 1994. Eleven surveys were returned, all containing a signed consent letter, representing a 13% rate. Determining the cause behind the poor response rate for this particular survey was not difficult. No surveys were returned from the years 1987 through 1989. The highest percentage of return was from the year 1994 (38% ), indicating that higher response rates were achieved if the client was polled within 1 year of using clinical services. To further substantiate this conclusion, two of the parents contacted by telephone refused to participate in the survey, and gave length of time as the reason behind their refusal. The overall response to the survey was positive, indicating a high rate of satisfaction among the survey respondents with the services provided at the Portland State University Speech-Language clinic.

This project aims to develop a portable product using Arduino technology to approximate hearing clinic tests, programmed with IAR Embedded Workbench. Designed for workplace use, the device allows individuals to evaluate their hearing in a quiet room, raising awareness and promoting regular hearing checks. The device should be placed in an environment free from other electronic devices to minimize interference. Users can conduct hearing tests independently, encouraging early detection of potential hearing issues and enabling timely intervention.The results are evaluated through direct comparisons between the product and clinic results, as well as smaller studies comparing the product’s average results in different age groups with existing data on average hearing ability in those groups. Key findings include a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 3.85 dB to 9.0 dB and a Mean Percentage Error (MPE) of 31.78% to 224.32% across age groups and frequencies. Clinical test comparisons show an MAE of 5.71 dB to 6.78 dB and an MPE of 20.10% to 119.04%. Significant discrepancies are noted at lower frequencies (125 Hz and 250 Hz) with higher error margins. Wide confidence intervals were observed, indicating substantial variability and suggesting that the device is less reliable at lower frequency levels. Further testing with a larger sample size is needed to enhance precision and reliability, as it would help narrow the confidence intervals and provide more robust and dependable results.