Search

To examine the inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability, internal consistency and practice effects associated with a new test, the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. Reliability estimates were obtained in a repeated-measures design through analysis of clinician video ratings of stroke participants completing the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. Inter-rater reliability was determined by comparing 15 independent clinicians' scores of 15 randomly selected videos. Intra-rater reliability was determined by comparing two clinicians' scores of 35 videos when re-scored after a two-week interval. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis demonstrated almost perfect inter-rater reliability (0.995; 95% confidence interval: 0.990–0.998), intra-rater reliability (0.994; 95% confidence interval: 0.989–0.997) and internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.940 (95% confidence interval: 0.920–1.0)). Almost perfect correlations (0.998; 95% confidence interval: 0.995–0.999) between face-to-face and video ratings were obtained. The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test demonstrates almost perfect inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability and internal consistency. High correlation coefficients and narrow confidence intervals demonstrated minimal practice effects with scoring or influence of years of clinical experience on test scores. Almost perfect correlations between face-to-face and video scoring methods indicate these reliability estimates have direct application to everyday practice. The test is available from brisbanetest.org. The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is a new measure for the assessment of acquired language disorders. The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test demonstrated almost perfect inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability and internal consistency. High reliability estimates and narrow confidence intervals indicated that test ratings vary minimally when administered by clinicians of different experience levels, or different levels of familiarity with the new measure. The test is a reliable measure of language performance for use in clinical practice and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To describe the development and determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test in detecting aphasia. Consecutive acute stroke admissions (n = 100; mean = 66.49y) participated in a single (assessor) blinded cross-sectional study. Index assessment was the ∼45 min Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is further divided into four 15–25 min Short Tests: two Foundation Tests (severe impairment), Standard (moderate) and High Level Test (mild). Independent reference standard included the Language Screening Test, Aphasia Screening Test, Comprehensive Aphasia Test and/or Measure for Cognitive-Linguistic Abilities, treating team diagnosis and aphasia referral post-ward discharge. Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test cut-off score of ≤157 demonstrated 80.8% (LR+ =10.9) sensitivity and 92.6% (LR− =0.21) specificity. All Short Tests reported specificities of ≥92.6%. Foundation Tests I (cut-off ≤61) and II (cut-off ≤51) reported lower sensitivity (≥57.5%) given their focus on severe conditions. The Standard (cut-off ≤90) and High Level Test (cut-off ≤78) reported sensitivities of ≥72.6%. The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is a sensitive assessment of aphasia. Diagnostically, the High Level Test recorded the highest psychometric capabilities of the Short Tests, equivalent to the full Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. The test is available for download from brisbanetest.org. Aphasia is a debilitating condition and accurate identification of language disorders is important in healthcare. Language assessment is complex and the accuracy of assessment procedures is dependent upon a variety of factors. The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is a new evidence-based language test specifically designed to adapt to varying patient need, clinical contexts and co-occurring conditions. In this cross-sectional validation study, the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test was found to be a sensitive measure for identifying aphasia in stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Sensory enhancement techniques, like other compensatory strategies, aim to reduce dysphagia symptoms. The use of carbonated liquids has been proposed as a possible sensory technique, however to date, there is limited information of its efficacy or guidance for clinical implementation. A narrative synthesis was completed to determine the quality and strength of the evidence base for use of carbonation as a compensatory strategy in dysphagia rehabilitation. Methods: From 101 articles initially identified, 14 articles met the study criteria. Eleven papers described the effects of carbonation on swallowing in healthy participants whereas three described the impact of carbonation in dysphagic populations. A narrative synthesis of papers was undertaken given the diversity of identified studies. Results: Synthesis of findings was challenging given the exploratory phase of most research activity with diverse populations described and extensive differences in research methodologies. There is currently weak, but potentially positive evidence to support using carbonation as a compensatory technique in dysphagia rehabilitation. Conclusion: Despite future potential, existing evidence fails to provide clear direction for the clinical implementation of carbonation. Validation of carbonation use with the dysphagic population requires further research with consistent, controlled methodologies, and larger cohorts of participants to inform potential for dysphagia rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]