Search

Background: Intervention studies aimed to improve the written production of single words by persons with aphasia have yielded promising results and there is growing interest in interventions targeting text writing. The development of technical writing aids offers opportunities for persons with aphasia, and studies have shown that using them can have a positive impact on written output. Aims: The aim was to investigate what impact training to use a computerised spell checker had on text writing in persons with aphasia. Methods & Procedures: The study had a multiple‐baseline single‐case experimental design replicated across six male Swedish participants with mild‐to‐moderate post‐stroke aphasia. The participants received training twice a week during 8 weeks, learning how to use the spell checker. At baseline and before every session, the participants wrote two texts which were logged in a keystroke‐logging tool. Dependent variables were continuously measured in the texts, and the participants performed tests of language function and answered questionnaires on reading and writing habits and health‐related quality of life before and after the intervention. The participants were also interviewed about how they had experienced the training. The results were evaluated on individual and group level. Results: The study showed that systematic individual training involving a spell checker was experienced as positive by the participants and that they all described their writing ability in more positive terms after the intervention. Evaluation showed statistically significant improvements on group level for the dependent variables of spelling accuracy, rated syntax, writing speed and proportion of unedited text during text writing when using the spell checker. The intervention also had a generalising effect on writing speed and editing during text writing without the spell checker and on spelling accuracy in a dictation test. The participants who had the greatest spelling problems were the ones who showed the most progress, but participants with only minor writing difficulties at baseline also improved. Conclusions & Implications: The study shows that a digital spelling aid constitutes effective support for people with aphasia and may also affect levels other than spelling. The training had a generalising positive effect on text writing and spelling in a test. Although writing difficulties is a persisting symptom in aphasia, it can be supported and improved through use of digital spelling aids. Hence, treatment of writing ability should always be included in the rehabilitation of people with aphasia. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Use of a technical writing aid can have a positive impact on the written output of persons with aphasia. Using a digital spell checker may improve spelling as well as other levels of writing, but it has not been investigated using a keystroke‐logging tool in combination with language‐test scores and results from questionnaires. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Through analyses on both individual and group level, this study shows that a digital spelling aid constitutes effective support for people with aphasia and also affects levels other than spelling. The training had a generalising positive effect on text writing and spelling in a test. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Digital spelling support, which is a relatively simple and inexpensive technology, can support and improve text writing in persons with post‐stroke aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Low‐grade glioma (LGG) is a type of brain tumour often situated in or near areas involved in language, sensory or motor functions. Depending on localization and tumour characteristics, language or cognitive impairments due to tumour growth and/or surgical resection are obvious risks. One task that may be at risk is writing, both because it requires intact language and memory function and because it is a very complex and cognitively demanding task. The most commonly reported language deficit in LGG patients is oral lexical‐retrieval difficulties, and poor lexical retrieval would be expected to affect writing fluency. Aims: To explore whether writing fluency is affected in LGG patients before and after surgery and whether it is related to performance on tasks of oral lexical retrieval. Methods & Procedures: Twenty consecutive patients with presumed LGG wrote a narrative and performed a copy task before undergoing surgery and at 3‐month follow‐up using keystroke‐logging software. The same tasks were performed by a reference group (N = 31). The patients were also tested using the Boston Naming Test (BNT) and word‐fluency tests before and after surgery. Writing fluency was compared between the patients and the reference group, and between the patients before and after surgery. Relationships between performance on tests of oral lexical retrieval and writing fluency were investigated both before and after surgery. Outcome & Results: Different aspects of writing fluency were affected in the LGG patients both before and after surgery. However, when controlling for the effect of typing speed, the LGG group differed significantly from the reference group only in the proportion of pauses within words. After surgery, a significant decline was seen in production rate and typing speed in the narrative task, and a significant increase was seen in pauses before words. Strong positive relationships were found between oral lexical retrieval and writing fluency both before and after surgery. Conclusions & Implications: Although aspects of writing fluency were affected both before and after surgery, the results indicate that typing speed is an important factor behind the pre‐surgery differences. However, the decline in overall productivity and the increase in pauses before words after surgery could be related to a lexical deficit. This is supported by the finding that oral lexical‐retrieval scores were strongly correlated with writing fluency. However, further exploration is needed to identify the language and cognitive abilities affecting writing processes in LGG patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]