Erin Godecke

Very early poststroke aphasia therapy: a pilot randomized controlled efficacy trial

Background and purpose Early stroke rehabilitation has shown benefits over spontaneous recovery. Insufficient evidence exists to determine the benefits of early aphasia intervention. We hypothesized that daily aphasia therapy would show better communication outcomes than usual care (UC) in early poststroke recovery. Method This prospective, randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial was conducted in three acute-care hospitals in Perth, Australia, each with over 200 stroke admissions annually. Patients with acute stroke causing moderate to severe aphasia were recruited at a median of three-days (range: 0–10 days) to receive daily aphasia therapy or usual care therapy. Individually tailored, impairment-based intervention was provided for the acute hospital stay or intervention phase (median: 19 days; range: 5–76). Primary outcome measures were the aphasia quotient and functional communication profile at acute hospital discharge or four-weeks poststroke, whichever came first. A random-number generator and sealed envelopes were used to randomize participants. Assessments were completed by a blinded assessor. Results Fifty-nine participants were recruited, with six withdrawals (10%) and seven deaths (12%) at six-months. Ninety percent had ischemic strokes, with 56·5% experiencing a total anterior circulation stroke. The group mean (±SD) age was 69·1 (±13·9) years. Six participants (18·75%) in the daily aphasia therapy group did not complete the minimum (150 min) therapy required for this study. The daily aphasia therapy intervention phase mean therapy session time was 45 min (range: 30–80) and the total mean amount of therapy for the daily aphasia therapy participants was 331 min (range: 30–1415). Four (15%) participants in the usual care group received therapy. The collective total therapy provided to these participants was 295 min over seven sessions. Usual care participants received an average of 10·5 min of therapy per week during the intervention phase. At the primary end point, a generalized estimating equations model demonstrated that after controlling for initial aphasia severity, participants receiving daily aphasia therapy scored 15·1 more points (P = 0·010) on the aphasia quotient and 11·3 more points (P = 0·004) on the functional communication profile than those receiving usual care therapy. Conclusions Daily aphasia therapy in very early stroke recovery improved communication outcomes in people with moderate to severe aphasia.

A comparison of aphasia therapy outcomes before and after a Very Early Rehabilitation programme following stroke

BACKGROUND Very early aphasia rehabilitation studies have shown mixed results. Differences in therapy intensity and therapy type contribute significantly to the equivocal results. AIMS To compare a standardized, prescribed very early aphasia therapy regimen with a historical usual care control group at therapy completion (4-5 weeks post-stroke) and again at follow-up (6 months). METHODS & PROCEDURES This study compared two cohorts from successive studies conducted in four Australian acute/sub-acute hospitals. The studies had near identical recruitment, blinded assessment and data-collection protocols. The Very Early Rehabilitation (VER) cohort (N = 20) had mild-severe aphasia and received up to 20 1-h sessions of impairment-based aphasia therapy, up to 5 weeks. The control cohort (n = 27) also had mild-severe aphasia and received usual care (UC) therapy for up to 4 weeks post-stroke. The primary outcome measure was the Aphasia Quotient (AQ) and a measure of communicative efficiency (DA) at therapy completion. Outcomes were measured at baseline, therapy completion and 6 months post-stroke and were compared using Generalised Estimating Equations (GEE) models. OUTCOMES & RESULTS After controlling for initial aphasia and stroke disability, the GEE models demonstrated that at the primary end-point participants receiving VER achieved 18% greater recovery on the AQ and 1.5% higher DA scores than those in the control cohort. At 6 months, the VER participants maintained a 16% advantage in recovery on the AQ and 0.6% more on DA scores over the control cohort participants. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS A prescribed, impairment-based aphasia therapy regimen, provided daily in very early post-stroke recovery, resulted in significantly greater communication gains in people with mild-severe aphasia at completion of therapy and at 6 months, when compared with a historical control cohort. Further research is required to demonstrate large-scale and long-term efficacy.

Development and validation of Australian aphasia rehabilitation best practice statements using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method

Objectives To develop and validate a national set of best practice statements for use in post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation. Design Literature review and statement validation using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM). Participants A national Community of Practice of over 250 speech pathologists, researchers, consumers and policymakers developed a framework consisting of eight areas of care in aphasia rehabilitation. This framework provided the structure for the development of a care pathway containing aphasia rehabilitation best practice statements. Nine speech pathologists with expertise in aphasia rehabilitation participated in two rounds of RAND/UCLA appropriateness ratings of the statements. Panellists consisted of researchers, service managers, clinicians and policymakers. Main outcome measures Statements that achieved a high level of agreement and an overall median score of 7–9 on a nine-point scale were rated as ‘appropriate’. Results 74 best practice statements were extracted from the literature and rated across eight areas of care (eg, receiving the right referrals, providing intervention). At the end of Round 1, 71 of the 74 statements were rated as appropriate, no statements were rated as inappropriate, and three statements were rated as uncertain. All 74 statements were then rated again in the face-to-face second round. 16 statements were added through splitting existing items or adding new statements. Seven statements were deleted leaving 83 statements. Agreement was reached for 82 of the final 83 statements. Conclusions This national set of 82 best practice statements across eight care areas for the rehabilitation of people with aphasia is the first to be validated by an expert panel. These statements form a crucial component of the Australian Aphasia Rehabilitation Pathway (AARP) (http://www.aphasiapathway.com.au) and provide the basis for more consistent implementation of evidence-based practice in stroke rehabilitation.

Amount of therapy matters in very early aphasia rehabilitation after stroke: A clinical prognostic model

BACKGROUND AND AIM The effects of very early aphasia therapy on recovery are equivocal. This article examines predictors of very early aphasia recovery through statistical modeling. METHODS This study involved a secondary analysis of merged data from two randomized, single-blind trials conducted in Australian acute and subacute hospitals. Study 1 (n = 59) compared daily therapy to usual ward care for up to 4 weeks poststroke in patients with moderate to severe aphasia. Study 2 (n = 20) compared daily group therapy to daily individual therapy for 20 1-hour sessions over 5 weeks, in patients with mild to severe aphasia. The primary outcome measure was the Western Aphasia Battery Aphasia Quotient (AQ) at therapy completion. This analysis used regression modeling to examine the effects of age, baseline AQ and baseline modified Rankin Scale (mRS), average therapy amount, therapy intensity, and number of therapy sessions on aphasia recovery. RESULTS Baseline AQ (p = 0.047), average therapy amount (p = 0.030), and baseline mRS (p = 0.043) were significant predictors in the final regression model, which explained 30% (p < 0.001) of variance in aphasia recovery. CONCLUSION The amount of very early aphasia therapy could significantly affect communication outcomes at 4 to 5 weeks poststroke. Further studies should include amount of therapy provided to enhance reliability of prognostic modeling in aphasia recovery.

“Ward talk”: Nurses’ interaction with people with and without aphasia in the very early period poststroke

Background: Nursing staff are the most frequent communication partners, after family members, for people in hospital poststroke, and they play an essential role in the multidisciplinary team. Recent research has found that patients are more cognitively and socially active when wards provide an “enriched environment” as compared to standard care. Therefore, language enrichment on acute wards is now being considered as a possible way to discourage “learned nonuse” of language in people with aphasia. Aims: This study involved an exploration of the nature of nurses’ interactions with three patients on an acute stroke ward, two with aphasia and one without, in order to understand the nature of the communicative environment in more detail. Methods & Procedures: Following all necessary ethics approval processes and consents, continuous video recordings of 7.5 hr each were run for three male patients (two aged 68 years and one aged 48 years) on the acute stroke ward within a teaching hospital in an Australian city. Two had left hemisphere strokes resulting in a Wernicke’s aphasia (WAB AQ = 47) and a global aphasia (WAB AQ = 9.2) and one had a right hemisphere stroke and no aphasia. All instances of interaction with nurses over that period were transcribed orthographically and analysed at a discourse level using a speech function analysis based on a systemic functional linguistic framework. Outcomes & Results: Overall, nurses made most of the opening moves, used closed questions, controlled the conversational floor, and did not generally interact about issues other than physical care. The patients with aphasia had restricted opportunity to use continuing and developing moves and most commonly fell into a pattern of closed question and simple response. There was little evidence of communicative repair by nurses and few supported conversation strategies employed. Patterns of moves identified through the speech function analysis revealed the disempowered position of the patients with aphasia compared to the patient without who used a wider range of speech functions that demonstrated more assertive interactions. Conclusions: This study suggests that nurses, in their role as key communication partners on the acute stroke ward, could help counter the development of learned nonuse by integrating more effective communication strategies into their daily care routines. Further conversation partner training could relieve communication breakdown and frustration and increase opportunities for satisfying conversational exchanges in this setting.

Early rehabilitation after stroke

Purpose of review Early rehabilitation is recommended in many guidelines, with limited evidence to guide practice. Brain neurobiology suggests that early training, at the right dose, will aid recovery. In this review, we highlight recent trials of early mobilization, aphasia, dysphagia and upper limb treatment in which intervention is commenced within 7 days of stroke and discuss future research directions. Recent findings Trials in this early time window are few. Although the seminal AVERT trial suggests that a cautious approach is necessary immediately (<24 h) after stroke, early mobility training and mobilization appear well tolerated, with few reasons to delay initiating some rehabilitation within the first week. The results of large clinical trials of early aphasia therapy are on the horizon, and examples of targeted upper limb treatments with better patient selection are emerging. Summary Early rehabilitation trials are complex, particularly those that intervene across acute and rehabilitation care settings, but these trials are important if we are to optimize recovery potential in the critical window for repair. Concerted efforts to standardize ‘early’ recruitment, appropriately stratify participants and implement longer term follow-up is needed. Trial standards are improving. New recommendations from a recent Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable will help drive new research.

Monologues and dialogues in aphasia : some initial comparisons

Background: In recent years, there has been a shift in aphasia research interest from analysis of monologues to conversational dialogues. However, where monologic research has focused primarily on aspects such as language structure and quantity, conversational research has mainly focused on pragmatic aspects of discourse such as turn taking and repair. While there is some acknowledgement of the differences between language use in monologues and dialogues in aphasia, few comparisons have been made that cover a broad range of both syntactic and semantic aspects. Aims: This study aims to compare the discourse of aphasic speakers and non-brain-damaged control speakers in monologues and dialogues by using a range of syntactic and semantic analyses. In so doing, it aims to explore whether or not it is necessary for researchers and clinicians to sample both contexts in order to gain a full picture of a persons linguistic skills. Methods & Procedures: Two individuals with aphasia of varying severity provided monologues about their stroke experience, then participated in dialogues with a “significant other” on the same topic. Two control speakers, matched as closely as possible with the speakers with aphasia, undertook the same tasks, however they discussed a serious illness they had experienced. The SALT program (Miller & Iglesias, 2008) analysed the resulting data for syntactic productivity and complexity, and semantic analyses from a Systemic Functional Linguistic framework (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004) were used to explore ideational, interpersonal, and textual meanings. Outcomes & Results: The syntactic measures demonstrated greater consistency across contexts, with the participants with aphasia using more and longer C-units in the monologue, although demonstrating more mazes in this context. The control speakers demonstrated slightly more variation but, like the speakers with aphasia, tended to use more words per C-unit in the monologue. Semantic measures demonstrated more variable patterns although some similarities also existed. Conclusions: The variation noted in the study supports the notion that clinicians and researchers should sample a variety of contexts in order to gain an overall picture of a persons language skills. Factors such as personality, topic, and conversation partner influence all seem to play a role in discourse production, particularly from the perspective of meanings conveyed. This study raises questions as to the actual effects of these factors on language structure and function and provides direction for future research in the area.

Constraint-induced aphasia therapy (CIAT): a randomised controlled trial in very early stroke rehabilitation

Background: Communication outcomes following stroke are improved when treatments for aphasia are administered early, within the first 3 months after stroke, and provided for more than 2 hours per week. However, uncertainty remains about the optimal type of aphasia therapy. Aims: We compared constraint-induced aphasia therapy (CIAT) with individual, impairment-based intervention, both administered early and daily after acute stroke. Methods & Procedures: This prospective, single-blinded, randomised, controlled trial recruited participants with mild to severe aphasia within 10 days of an acute stroke from acute/subacute Perth metropolitan hospitals (n = 20). Participants were allocated by computer-generated block randomisation method to either the CIAT (n = 12) or individual, impairment-based intervention group (n = 8) delivered at the same intensity (45–60 min, 5 days a week) for 20 sessions over 5 weeks (15–20 hours total). The primary outcome, measured after completing the intervention, was the Aphasia Quotient (AQ) from the Western Aphasia Battery. Secondary outcomes were the AQ at 12 and 26 weeks post stroke, a Discourse Analysis (DA) score and the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale (SAQoL), measured at therapy completion, 12 and 26 weeks post stroke. There was a 10% (n = 2) dropout at the primary end point, both participants were in the CIAT group. The estimates for each treatment group were compared using repeated measures ANOVAs. Data from the 26-week follow-up assessment are presented, however, were not included in the between-group comparisons due to the low number of data points in each group. Outcomes & Results: Within groups analyses comparing performance at baseline, therapy completion, and 12 weeks post stroke revealed a statistically significant treatment effect for the AQ (p < .001), DA (p = .002), and SAQoL (p < .001). Between groups analysis found there was no significant difference between the CIAT and individual therapy groups on any outcome measure. Conclusions: CIAT and individual therapy produced comparable amounts of change in the very early phase of recovery suggesting a standard, intensive daily dose of therapy within this period of recovery is feasible and beneficial. There were no significant differences between the two groups demonstrating that CIAT, which is provided in a group format, may be a viable option in the very early phase of aphasia recovery. The study highlights the need for further research into the impact of therapy type in very early aphasia therapy.

A randomized controlled trial of very early rehabilitation in speech after stroke

Rationale The efficacy of rehabilitation therapy for aphasia caused by stroke is uncertain. Aims and hypothesis The Very Early Rehabilitation of Speech (VERSE) trial aims to determine if intensive prescribed aphasia therapy (VERSE) is more effective and cost saving than non-prescribed, intensive (usual care-plus) and non-intensive usual care (UC) therapy when started within 15 days of stroke onset and continued daily over four weeks. We hypothesize that aphasia therapy when started very early after stroke and delivered daily could enhance recovery of communication compared with UC. Sample size estimates A total of 246 participants (82 per arm) will provide 80% power to detect a 4.4% improvement on aphasia quotient between VERSE and UC plus at a significance level of α = 0.05. Setting Acute-care hospitals and accompanying rehabilitation services throughout Australia, 2014–2017. Design Three-arm, prospective, randomized, parallel group, open-label, blinded endpoint assessment (PROBE) trial. Participants Acute stroke in previous 14 days and aphasia diagnosed by aphasia quotient (AQ) of the Western Aphasia Battery (WAB). Randomization Computer-generated blocked randomization procedure stratified by aphasia severity according to Western Aphasia Battery, to one of three arms. Intervention All participants receive UC—usual ward-based aphasia therapy. Arm 1: UC—no additional therapy; Arm 2: UC-plus usual ward-based therapy; Arm 3: VERSE therapy—a prescribed and structured aphasia therapy program. Arms 2 and 3 receive a total of 20 additional sessions (45–60 min, provided daily) of aphasia therapy. The additional intervention must be provided before day 50 post stroke. Study outcome measures The aphasia quotient of Western Aphasia Battery at 12 weeks post stroke. Secondary outcomes include discourse measures, the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39 and the Aphasia Depression Rating Scale at 12 and 26 weeks. Economic evaluation Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios at 26 weeks will be reported. Discussion This trial is designed to test whether the intensive and prescribed VERSE intervention is effective in promoting maximum recovery and preventing costly health complications in a vulnerable population of survivors of stroke. It will also provide novel, prospective, aphasia specific cost-effectiveness data to guide future policy development for this population.

Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests

Background and purpose Accurate aphasia diagnosis is important in stroke care. A wide range of language tests are available and include informal assessments, tests developed by healthcare institutions and commercially published tests available for purchase in pre-packaged kits. The psychometrics of these tests are often reported online or within the purchased test manuals, not the peer-reviewed literature, therefore the diagnostic capabilities of these measures have not been systematically evaluated. This review aimed to identify both commercial and non-commercial language tests and tests used in stroke care and to examine the diagnostic capabilities of all identified measures in diagnosing aphasia in stroke populations. Methods Language tests were identified through a systematic search of 161 publisher databases, professional and resource websites and language tests reported to be used in stroke care. Two independent reviewers evaluated test manuals or associated resources for cohort or cross-sectional studies reporting the tests’ diagnostic capabilities (sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios or diagnostic odds ratios) in differentiating aphasic and non-aphasic stroke populations. Results Fifty-six tests met the study eligibility criteria. Six “non-specialist” brief screening tests reported sensitivity and specificity information, however none of these measures reported to meet the specific diagnostic needs of speech pathologists. The 50 remaining measures either did not report validity data (n = 7); did not compare patient test performance with a comparison group (n = 17); included non-stroke participants within their samples (n = 23) or did not compare stroke patient performance against a language reference standard (n = 3). Diagnostic sensitivity analysis was completed for six speech pathology measures (WAB, PICA, CADL-2, ASHA-FACS, Adult FAVRES and EFA-4), however all studies compared aphasic performance with that of non-stroke healthy controls and were consequently excluded from the review. Conclusions No speech pathology test was found which reported diagnostic data for identifying aphasia in stroke populations. A diagnostically validated post-stroke aphasia test is needed.