Richard C. Katz

Computers in the Treatment of Chronic Aphasia

Computers and related technology can increase the amount of treatment received by adults with chronic aphasia. Computers used in treatment, however, are only valuable to the patient if the intervention is efficacious. Real and potential applications of computer technology are discussed in the context of three roles of computerized aphasia treatment for adults with chronic aphasia. Pertinent studies regarding Phases 1 and 2 are briefly described. The only Phase 3 study of efficacy of computerized aphasia treatment is more fully described and its implications discussed.

Computerized hierarchical reading treatment in aphasia

Abstract Computerized reading activities were presented to 43 chronic aphasic subjects who were no longer receiving speech-language therapy in an attempt to determine the effectiveness of computer-provided treatment. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: 78-hours of Computer Reading Treatment, 78-hours of Computer Stimulation (‘non-language’ activities), or No Treatment. Clinician interaction was minimal. Treatment software automatically adjusted task difficulty in response to subject performance by incorporating traditional treatment procedures, such as heirarchically arranged tasks and measurement of performance on baseline and generalization stimulus sets, in conjunction with complex branching algorithms. Three administrations of standardized tests at baseline, three months and six months revealed improved scores (p < 0·05) for the Treatment group. Additionally, the Treatment group made more improvement (p < 0·05) on the Porch Index of Communicative Ability Overall score than the ...

Efficacy of Aphasia Treatment Using Microcomputers

Abstract Microcomputers and treatment programs are discussed with respect to aphasia rehabilitation. The microcomputer is described as a powerful clinical tool that can administer treatment activities designed by a clinician or programmer and measure patient performance on tasks. Sophisticated programs can modify tasks and provide appropriate cues in response to the performance of patients. A computer, however, is only as good as its software. Treatment programs are limited less by hardware than by the lack of familiarity and technical knowledge of clinicians and researchers with microcomputers and programs. Evaluative procedures should not be by-passed in the rush to develop treatment software. Recently reported group and single–case design studies are described that investigate the efficacy of various computerized treatment programs. Recommendations are made for future development and evaluation of treatment programs.