No abstract

Background: A core outcome set (COS; an agreed, minimum set of outcomes) was needed to address the heterogeneous measurement of outcomes in aphasia treatment research and to facilitate the production of transparent, meaningful and efficient outcome data. Objective: The Research Outcome Measurement in Aphasia (ROMA) consensus statement provides evidence-based recommendations for the measurement of outcomes for adults with post-stroke aphasia within phase I-IV aphasia treatment studies. Methods: This statement was informed by a four-year program of research which comprised investigation of stakeholder-important outcomes using consensus processes, a scoping review of aphasia outcome measurement instruments, and an international consensus meeting. This paper provides an overview of this process and presents the results and recommendations arising from the international consensus meeting. Results: Five essential outcome constructs were identified: Language, communication, patient-reported satisfaction with treatment and impact of treatment, emotional wellbeing, and quality of life. Consensus was reached for the following measurement instruments: Language: The Western Aphasia Battery Revised (WAB-R) (74% consensus); emotional well-being: General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)-12 (83% consensus); quality of life: Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale (SAQOL-39) (96% consensus). Consensus was unable to be reached for measures of communication (where multiple measures exist) or patientreported satisfaction with treatment or impact of treatment (where no measures exist). Discussion: Harmonisation of the ROMA COS with other core outcome initiatives in stroke rehabilitation is discussed. Ongoing research and consensus processes are outlined. Conclusion: The WAB-R, GHQ-12, and SAQOL-39 are recommended to be routinely included within phase I-IV aphasia treatment studies. This consensus statement has been endorsed by the Collaboration of Aphasia Trialists, the British Aphasiology Society, the ROMA consensus panel

Apraxia of speech (AOS) is typically described as a motor-speech disorder with clinically well-defined symptoms, but without a clear understanding of the underlying problems in motor control. A number of studies have compared the speech of subjects with AOS to the fluent speech of controls, but only a few have included speech movement data and if so, this was primarily restricted to the study of single articulators. If AOS reflects a basic neuromotor dysfunction, this should somehow be evident in the production of both dysfluent and perceptually fluent speech. The current study compared motor control strategies for the production of perceptually fluent speech between a young woman with apraxia of speech (AOS) and Broca's aphasia and a group of age-matched control speakers using concepts and tools from articulation-based theories. In addition, to examine the potential role of specific movement variables on gestural coordination, a second part of this study involved a comparison of fluent and dysfluent speech samples from the speaker with AOS. Movement data from the lips, jaw and tongue were acquired using the AG-100 EMMA system during the reiterated production of multisyllabic nonwords. The findings indicated that although in general kinematic parameters of fluent speech were similar in the subject with AOS and Broca's aphasia to those of the age-matched controls, speech task-related differences were observed in upper lip movements and lip coordination. The comparison between fluent and dysfluent speech characteristics suggested that fluent speech was achieved through the use of specific motor control strategies, highlighting the potential association between the stability of coordinative patterns and movement range, as described in Coordination Dynamics theory.

Research has shown that bilinguals can perform similarly, better or poorly on verbal fluency task compared to monolinguals. Verbal fluency data for semantic (animals, fruits and vegetables, and clothing) and letter fluency (F, A, S) were collected from 25 Bengali–English bilinguals and 25 English monolinguals in English. The groups were matched for receptive vocabulary, age, education and non-verbal intelligence. We used a wide range of measures to characterize fluency performance: number of correct, fluency difference score, time-course analysis (1st RT, Sub-RT, initiation, slope), clustering, and switching. Participants completed three executive control measures tapping into inhibitory control, mental-set shifting and working memory. Differences between the groups were significant when executive control demands were higher such as number of correct responses in letter fluency, fluency difference score, Sub-RT, slope and cluster size for letter fluency, such that bilinguals outperform the monolinguals. Stroop performance correlated positively with the slope only for the bilinguals.

The findings suggest that for PWA the search and retrieval process is less productive and more effortful. This is indicated by smaller cluster size, fewer switches associated with increased between-cluster pause durations, as well as overall slowed retrieval times for the words. This shows that the difficulties with verbal fluency performance in aphasia have a strong basis in their lexical retrieval processes, as well as some difficulties in the executive component of the task.

This study investigated a new treatment in which sentence production abilities were trained in a small group of individuals and nonfluent aphasia. It was based upon a mapping therapy approach which holds that sentence production and comprehension impairments are due to difficulties in mapping between the meaning form (thematic roles) and the syntactic form of sentences. We trained production of both canonical and noncanonical reversible sentences. Three patients received treatment and two served as control participants. Patients who received treatment demonstrated acquisition of all trained sentence structures. They also demonstrated across-task generalisation of treated and some untreated sentence structures on two tasks of constrained sentence production, and showed some improvements on a narrative task. One control participant improved on some of these measures and the other did not. There was no noted improvement in sentence comprehension abilities following treatment. Results are discussed with reference to the heterogeneity of underlying impairments in sentence production impairments in nonfluent patients, and the possible mechanisms by which improvement in sentence production might have been achieved in treatment.

The findings challenge the theoretical assumptions that phonological cues map to phonological processes. Instead, phonological information benefits the earliest stages of picture recognition, aiding the initial categorization of the target. The data help to explain why patterns of cueing are not consistent in aphasia; that is, it is not the case that phonological impairments always benefit from phonological cues and semantic impairments form semantic cues. A substantial amount of the literature in naming therapy focuses on picture naming paradigms. Therefore, the results are also critically important for rehabilitation, allowing for therapy development to be more rooted in the true mechanisms through which cues are processed.

Background: Individuals' right to be involved with decisions regarding their health and social care is the cornerstone for modern patientcentred care. Decision-making is a complex process that involves multiple cognitive and linguistic abilities. These are often challenging for people with aphasia (PWA). The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) Code of Practice (2007) recommends that speech and language therapists (SLTs) support capacity assessments for individuals with communication problems, such as PWA. To date, little is known regarding SLTs' involvement in the UK for supporting decision-making and capacity assessment for PWA. Aims: This research provides data to document when, how, and the extent to which SLTs are being used in capacity assessment for PWA in England. We also determined SLTs' training and resource needs in capacity assessments, and their role in inter-professional training. Methods & Procedures: 56 SLTs working with PWA from a wide range of clinical settings in England were recruited; they completed a secure questionnaire using the online survey tool Survey Monkey. The questionnaire collected information in the following areas: knowledge and awareness of the MCA; current involvement of SLTs in capacity assessments and decision-making; inter-professional understanding of SLTs roles in capacity assessments; and training needs of SLTs. Outcomes & Results: The SLTs who participated in this survey indicated that they were not regularly involved to support capacity assessment for PWA. Moreover, they also reported that other professionals on the care team did not fully recognise or utilise their skills in supporting capacity assessment for PWA. Moreover, SLTs were not solicited to train professionals regarding communication difficulties in aphasia and its impact on capacity assessments. SLTs wanted profession-specific training to fulfil the role of supporting PWA in capacity assessments more effectively and reliably. Conclusions: Healthcare professionals have an ethical duty to ensure that judgements of capacity are unbiased and accurate. SLTs have an important contribution to make but their skills and knowledge are not fully recognised or utilised. These findings highlight an important need to raise the profile of SLTs' skills and expertise amongst professionals through education and/or inter-professional communications. This would enable SLTs to be regularly and effectively utilised in capacity assessments and decision-making for PWA. ARTICLE HISTORY