Search

Background: Pictures drawn by people with aphasia (PWA) are often more challenging to understand than those drawn by healthy people. There are two types of objects: those that tend to be drawn symbolically (symbolically drawn objects—SOs) and those that are likely to be drawn realistically (realistically drawn objects—ROs). Aims: To compare the identification rate and number of misunderstanding types between SOs and ROs drawn by PWA and healthy controls (HCs). To reveal trends in the misunderstandings of drawings by PWA, and to identify the language or cognitive abilities related to the identification rate of pictures drawn by PWA. Methods & Procedures: We designed a drawing task involving SOs and ROs. A total of 18 PWA and 30 HCs completed the task, and respondents identified the drawings. The identification rate and number of misunderstandings were analysed with two‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) including group (PWA and HCs) and object type (SOs and ROs). The misunderstandings were divided into four categories varying in semantic and morphological similarity; these ratios were examined with a chi‐square test. The relationships of language and cognitive abilities with the identification rate were investigated with multiple regression analyses. Outcomes & Results: There was a significant effect of the interaction between group and object type on the identification rate (F(1.1387) = 3.90, Mean Squared Error (MSE) = 4139.67, p = 0.04): the identification rates for ROs were lower in the PWA than in the HCs. For the number of misunderstanding types, an interaction was observed between group and object type (F(1.56) = 8.26, MSE = 26.93, p < 0.01): the number of misunderstanding types for ROs in the PWA was greater than that in the HCs. The misunderstanding patterns differed between ROs and SOs (χ2(3) = 694.30, p < 0.001, V = 0.37). ROs were semantically related, whereas SOs were morphologically related. The identification rates of ROs and SOs were correlated only with Kanji writing scores (ROs: β = 3.66, p = 0.01; SOs: β = 6.57, p < 0.01). Conclusions & Implications: In drawings by the PWA, SOs had a higher identification rate, while ROs had a lower identification rate and a greater variety of misunderstandings. SOs may increase drawing motivation. Interventions to improve the identifiability of SOs and ROs should reflect each character. Identification rates were correlated only with Kanji writing scores. The PWA, whose native language was Japanese and had preserved Kanji writing abilities, and their communication abilities may be increased through drawing. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: PWA often have impaired drawing abilities and draw pictures that third parties misinterpret. Some objects tend to be drawn symbolically, and some are drawn realistically. However, it is not clear whether there is a difference between these types of drawings depicted by PWA in identifiability and the tendency to be misunderstood by ordinary people. In addition, the relationships between language or cognitive abilities and the identification rate of drawn pictures are not clear. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge: The identification rate differed between SOs and ROs. In drawings by PWA, SOs had a higher identification rate, while ROs had a lower identification rate and the greatest variety of misunderstandings. Approximately half of the misunderstandings were related to the target object. SOs tended to be confused with morphologically related objects, while ROs tended to be confused with semantically related objects. Identification rates were correlated only with Kanji writing scores. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: To motivate PWA's drawing, it is suitable to begin with SOs. Examining drawing ability from the perspective of SOs and ROs increases the chance of identifying drawing ability. PWA whose native language is Japanese and have preserved Kanji writing abilities may be able to increase their communication abilities through drawing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) is a patient‐reported outcome measure (PROM) designed to measure the extent of interference, or difficulty, experienced by adults with communication disorders participating in their day‐to‐day communication activities. To date, there is limited evidence regarding sensitivity of the CPIB for capturing change with intervention in people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD). Aims: The purpose of this study was to examine the following measurement properties of the CPIB in PwPD who received community‐based, standard care, speech‐language therapy focusing on motor speech concerns: Change over time between treatment and observation groups, comparison to patient‐defined ideal and satisfactory targets, comparison of static short form to computerised adaptive testing (CAT), comparison of self to proxy‐rated scores, and comparison to other common PROMs. Methods and Procedures: Forty‐six PwPD (20 treatment/26 observation) completed data collection upon enrolment (pre‐treatment) and 6 months later. In addition to the CPIB, PROMs included the Voice Handicap Index 10‐item short form (VHI‐10), PROMIS Global Health‐Related Quality of Life, Levels of Speech Usage, self‐rated speech severity, and Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 (PHQ‐9). Participants also engaged in qualitative interviews. Forty‐four family members completed proxy CPIB ratings. Outcomes and Results: There were no significant differences between treatment and observation groups on the CPIB pre‐treatment, but there were significant differences post‐treatment. The differences appeared to be largely due to significant gains in the treatment group. No participants reached their ideal CPIB target, and few reached their satisfactory target. Static CPIB short form and CAT scores were not significantly different, with an average of five CAT items administered per participant. Overall group similarities between patient and proxy scores may have obscured wide variability across individual patient‐proxy pairs. Associations between CPIB and VHI‐10, health‐related quality of life, self‐reported speech severity, and depression ranged from weak to moderate. Conclusions and Implications: The CPIB appears to be sensitive to capturing change with intervention, and similar results are obtained with the static short form and CAT formats. One clinical caution is that even with gains observed in the treatment group, no participants obtained their ideal communicative participation goals, and few obtained a satisfactory level of communicative participation. Thus, while current interventions are beneficial, they may not meet the full range of clients' communication needs. While responding to the CPIB through a proxy rater may be feasible, caution is warranted due to concerns about maintaining the autonomy of PwPD. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: The communication disorders associated with Parkinson's disease (PD) can have a negative impact on quality of life and life participation as measured by patient (or person)‐reported outcome measures (PROMs). The Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) is one PROM available to use with adults with communication disorders. However, little is known about whether the CPIB captures changes in communicative participation as a result of standard care treatment for people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD). Use of computerised adaptive testing (CAT), proxy report and comparison to targeted participation outcomes have not been explored. What this study adds to existing knowledge: As a result of this study, we know that the CPIB captured differences between treatment and observation groups after community‐based, standard care speech therapy intervention focusing on motor speech production in PwPD. Static short form and CAT scores did not differ significantly, so the CAT option provides better efficiency requiring, on average, five items to administer compared to the 10‐item short form. Proxy and PwPD scores did not differ as a group, but wide variability was noted. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: The CPIB may be a clinically sensitive instrument for capturing changes in communicative participation after treatment. No participants met their ideal CPIB target, and few reached their satisfactory target, suggesting that while current interventions contribute to gains in communicative participation, there are still unmet needs that may call for support and interventions addressing the more complex array of factors affecting communicative participation outcomes for PwPD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with aphasia are vulnerable recipients of healthcare. The nature of the communicative environment and the communication disability can adversely impact access to timely and quality healthcare. Student healthcare professionals are often underprepared to interact successfully with people with aphasia and may benefit from communication partner training (CPT). Aims: To investigate the potential effectiveness and acceptability of a brief, two‐part introductory Supported Conversation for Adults with Aphasia (SCA™)‐based CPT package, delivered to a sample of students across a diverse range of healthcare disciplines. Methods & Procedures: A pre–post‐within group experimental design was used to investigate the potential effectiveness and acceptability of an online CPT package (50 minute module + 1 hour workshop) for healthcare students. The Aphasia Attitudes, Strategies and Knowledge (AASK) survey measured participants' knowledge of aphasia, facilitative communication strategies and attitudes towards people with aphasia. Data were collected pre‐training, following the training module and following the workshop, and 6 weeks post‐training. Statistical analysis was conducted on the AASK data. In addition, participant feedback (ratings and open text responses) was collected after the workshop. Ratings were analysed descriptively, and thematic content analysis was used for open text responses. Outcomes & Results: 236 participants completed the pre‐training AASK and 106 completed the AASK at subsequent time points. Statistically significant gains were demonstrated from pre‐ to post‐module completion. Between the end of the module and the end of the workshop, some gains were maintained and others showed further statistically significantly improvements. While all gains were not maintained at the 6‐week follow‐up, statistically significantly improvements from pre‐training scores remained evident. Student feedback was predominantly positive, with suggested improvements for training content and length. Conclusions & Implications: The results provide preliminary evidence that a brief, online CPT package can support student healthcare professionals' knowledge and attitudes towards aphasia and communicating with people with aphasia. Online training was acceptable to students and feasible as an embedded or optional component of curriculum. Ongoing training (e.g., in the form of refresher sessions) and inclusion of a skills‐based component are recommended to maximize communication skill development. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Student healthcare professionals recognize the need to develop knowledge and skills to successfully support people with communication disability, such as aphasia, to participate effectively in their healthcare. Evidence in favour of online communication partner training for student healthcare professionals is currently limited. What this study adds to the existing knowledge: This study demonstrates that a brief introductory online communication partner training program can be efficacious for improving knowledge and attitudes regarding communicating with people who have aphasia. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Students will likely need further ongoing refresher training with inclusion of practical components to develop and maintain the knowledge and skills required to be proficient communication partners with people with aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Very young children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds often show poorer language development. Whilst there have been attempts to provide early intervention programmes, these sometimes miss the most disadvantaged groups. Aims: This report presents preliminary feasibility and effectiveness data for a novel language intervention designed for parents of toddlers in the United Kingdom. Methods and Procedures: In total, 43 UK families of 2–4‐year‐olds were recruited to the study, half of whom completed an 8‐week course (Tots Talking) focussed on parent interaction, and half of whom acted as wait‐list controls. Results and Outcomes: Results suggest that such programmes are feasible for families with 86% staying in the intervention. In addition, greater changes in underlying communication skills such as joint attention and gesture were evident compared to wait‐list controls. Conclusions and Implications: We conclude that pre‐verbal skills may be more important to measure as initial outcomes than language or vocabulary change in this population. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds are at higher risk of communication difficulties and there is a need for community intervention programmes for very young children. What this study adds: This study suggests that such programmes can be feasible and effective, but that very early/basic communicative skills (such as joint attention) may be boosted first rather than language or vocabulary. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Children's centres and other community services could feasibly run short parent facing courses emphasising contingent communication in low SES families and other diverse groups. These may be more successful run with younger preschoolers. Joint attention may be a better focus of intervention before expecting vocabulary or language change. Community health professionals may find this information useful in referring and supporting families in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]