Search

Background: Many people with aphasia have word‐finding difficulties, with some showing particular difficulties with verbs. Picture‐naming therapy is often used to improve naming, but gains are usually limited to therapy items and do not transfer to conversation. Therapy where words are produced in sentences and in real‐life activities may be more effective. Aims: The current pilot study investigated whether an activity‐oriented therapy approach would be accepted and viable if implemented in a community setting, and whether communicating whilst cooking was more beneficial than using paper‐based activities. If successful, it would be expected that verb production would improve in structured and unstructured tasks in both naming and narrative tasks. Methods & Procedures: The study employed a case‐series repeated‐measures design, with testing of treated and control items. Seven adults with anomia participated, although only five completed the full programme. Participants were divided into two groups and each group completed both treatments, but in different orders. Each treatment was employed for six 2‐h sessions over a 3‐week period. Outcomes & Results: Naming of both treated and untreated verbs showed a statistically significant improvement following both treatments and this continued into the maintenance phase. There was a numerical but not statistically significant gain in the variety of verbs used in spoken narratives. Participants predominantly chose positive terms to describe their experience of the programme, but did not prefer one therapy over the other. Conclusions & Implications: Preliminary findings suggest that an activity‐oriented therapy approach, whether it involves carrying out tasks or paper‐based activities, can result in clinically meaningful improvements for people with chronic aphasia. Further research using a randomized control trial is required to determine whether cooking therapy alone is effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Most investigations of pharmacotherapy for treating Alzheimer's disease focus on patients with mild-to-moderate symptoms, with little evidence to guide clinical decisions when symptoms become severe. We examined whether continuing donepezil, or commencing memantine, is cost-effective for community-dwelling, moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease patients.Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis was based on a 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, factorial clinical trial. A total of 295 community-dwelling patients with moderate/severe Alzheimer's disease, already treated with donepezil, were randomised to: (i) continue donepezil; (ii) discontinue donepezil; (iii) discontinue donepezil and start memantine; or (iv) continue donepezil and start memantine.Results: Continuing donepezil for 52 weeks was more cost-effective than discontinuation, considering cognition, activities of daily living and health-related quality of life. Starting memantine was more cost-effective than donepezil discontinuation. Donepezil-memantine combined is not more cost-effective than donepezil alone.Conclusions: Robust evidence is now available to inform clinical decisions and commissioning strategies so as to improve patients' lives whilst making efficient use of available resources. Clinical guidelines for treating moderate/severe Alzheimer's disease, such as those issued by NICE in England and Wales, should be revisited. © 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background A large number of people who experience a stroke are affected by dysarthria. This may be in isolation or in association with aphasia and/or dysphagia. Despite evidence highlighting the psychological and social impact of having post-stroke dysarthria and a number of clinical guidelines that make recommendations for appropriate management, little is known currently about UK service delivery issues relating to speech and language therapy (SLT) assessment and treatment for this group. Such evidence is necessary in order to plan, develop and research services for people with post-stroke dysarthria. Aims To gain an overview of SLT practices in the management of people with dysarthria after stroke in the UK. Methods & Procedures SLTs in the UK were asked to complete an online survey addressing referral patterns, caseload profiles, and their assessment and intervention methods for post-stroke dysarthria. In the absence of a national register of clinicians working with people with acquired dysarthria, a snowballing method was used to facilitate participant recruitment. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics. Outcomes & Results A total of 146 SLTs responded. The majority were employed by the National Health Service (NHS). Most patients were referred within 1 week post-stroke. Almost half the respondents did not regularly use formal assessments and the use of instrumentation was rare, including the use of video recording. The focus of therapy for mild, moderate and severe dysarthria did not differ significantly for clinicians. A little under half the respondents endorsed non-verbal oral exercises in rehabilitation. The survey demonstrated some appreciation of the centrality of regular intensive practice to effect change, but this was in a minority. Conclusions & Implications Through this research it became clear that basic information regarding post-stroke dysarthria incidence, prevalence and core demographics is currently unavailable. More embedded NHS SLT reporting systems would make a significant contribution to this area. A more in-depth examination is required of the natural history of dysarthria over the months and years following stroke, of SLT practices in relation to post-stroke dysarthria, with investigations to understand more fully the choices SLTs make and how this relates to available evidence to support their clinical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale, aims and objectives Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of a Post-it® note to increase response rates and shorten response times to a 4-month postal follow-up questionnaire sent to participants taking part in the Collaborative Care in Screen-Positive Elders (CASPER) trials. Method Our trial was a two-arm randomized controlled trial comparing response rates to questionnaires with a printed Post-it® note (intervention) and without (control), nested in multi centred randomized controlled trials of older people with varying levels of depressive symptoms; the CASPER+ and CASPER Self Help for those At Risk of Depression (SHARD) trials. A total of 611 participants were eligible and randomized. The primary outcome was response rates, secondary outcomes were time to response and need for a reminder. Results Of 297 participants, 266 (89.6%) returned their 4-month questionnaire in the post-it note arm, compared with 282 of 314 participants (89.8%) in the control arm (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.57, 1.65, P = 0.913). There were no statistically significant differences in time to respond or the need to be sent a reminder. Patients with a major depressive episode were more likely to return questionnaires with post-it notes ( P of interaction = .019). Conclusion There was no significant difference in response rates, time to response, or the need for a reminder between the intervention and control at 4-month follow up for older people with depressive symptoms. However, there was a significant interaction between the Post-it® note group and level of depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]