This paper reviews new theoretical and practical developments in working with partners of people with aphasia and describes the development of a clinician's resource entitled 'SPPARC: Supporting Partners of People with Aphasia in Relationships and Conversation'. It focuses particularly on one part of that resource: the SPPARC Conversation Training Programme, which adapts conversation analysis for clinical use. The paper describes the stages involved in assessing and working on conversation in everyday life.

Background: A recent review of interaction (or conversation)-focused therapy highlighted the potential of programmes targeting the person with aphasia (PWA) directly. However, it noted the key limitations of current work in this field to be a reliance on single case analyses and qualitative evidence of change, a situation that is not unusual when a complex behavioural intervention is in the early stages of development and evaluation. Aims: This article aims to evaluate an intervention that targeted a PWA and their conversation partner (CP), a dyad, as equals in a novel conversation therapy for agrammatic aphasia, using both quantitative and qualitative evidence of change. The intervention aimed to increase the insight of a dyad into facilitator and barrier conversation behaviours, to increase the understanding of the effect of agrammatism on communication, and to support each speaker to choose three strategies to work on in therapy to increase mutual understanding and enhance conversation. Methods & Procedures: Quantitative and qualitative methods are used to analyse multiple pre-therapy and follow up assessments of conversation for two dyads. Outcomes & Results: Results show that one person with severe and chronic agrammatic aphasia was able to select and practise strategies that led to qualitative and quantitative changes in his post-therapy conversations. The other PWA showed a numerical increase in one of his three strategies post therapy, but no significant quantitative change. Although both CPs significantly reduced barrier behaviours in their post-therapy conversations, neither showed a significant increase in the strategies they chose to work on. For one CP, there was qualitative evidence of the use of different turn types. Conclusions: Individually tailored input from a speech and language therapist can assist some people with chronic agrammatism to develop conversational strategies that enhance communication. Outcomes are influenced by the severity and extent of language deficits affecting, for example, single word writing. In terms of behaviour change for CPs, it appears that it may be easier to reduce barrier behaviours rather than to increase the use of facilitatory strategies. The results have implications for collaborative goal setting with clients undergoing conversation therapy.

No abstract

This article gives an overview of the application to aphasia of conversation analysis (CA), a qualitative methodology for the analysis of recorded, naturally occurring talk produced in everyday human interaction. CA, like pragmatics, considers language use in context, but it differs from other analytical frameworks because the clinician is not making interpretations about how an aspect of language should be coded or judging whether an utterance is successful or adequate in terms of communication. We first outline the CA methodology before discussing its application to the assessment of aphasia, principally through the use of two published assessment tools. We then move on to illustrate applications of CA in the field of aphasia therapy by discussing two single case study interventions. Key conversation behaviors are illustrated with transcripts from interactions recorded by the person with aphasia and the person's habitual conversation partner in the home environment. Finally, we explore the implications of using CA as a tool for assessment and treatment in aphasia.

No abstract

Background & Aims: A recent systematic review of conversation training for communication partners of people with aphasia has shown that it is effective, and improves participation in conversation for people with chronic aphasia. Other research suggests that people with aphasia are better able to learn communication strategies in an environment which closely mirrors that of expected use, and that cognitive flexibility may be a better predictor of response to therapy than severity of language impairment. This study reports results for a single case, one of a case series evaluation of a programme of conversation training for agrammatism that directly involves a person with aphasia (PWA) as well as their communication partner. It explores how a PWA is able to engage with and learn from the therapy, and whether this leads to qualitative change in post-therapy conversation behaviours. Methods & Procedures:A 55-year-old man with chronic agrammatism and his wife took part in eight weekly sessions of conversation therapy, adapted from Supporting Partners of People With Aphasia in Relationships and Conversation (SPPARC). Language and conversation were assessed before and after therapy, and the couple's views on conversation and disability were elicited. Conversation analysis was used to analyse: (1) pre-therapy conversation patterns, (2) how the PWA engaged and learned during therapy and the forms of facilitation that aided this process, and (3) qualitative change in post-therapy conversation behaviour. Outcomes & Results: After therapy, the PWA showed increased insight and acceptance of the use of strategies such as writing and drawing in the face of conversational difficulty. However, use was prompted by his wife and was rarely spontaneous. Conclusions & Implications:This single case study suggests that conversation training based around an experiential learning process is able to engage a PWA directly in learning about the effects of aphasia on conversation. Key facilitators were self-study via video and experience of practising conversation whilst receiving online feedback from a speech and language therapist. However, increased insight did not automatically change conversation behaviour. Although he better understood the effects of his aphasia on conversations with his wife, learning stopped short of the ultimate goal of the conversation training programme; the spontaneous use of strategies worked on in therapy when faced with conversation breakdown. One explanation may be that limited cognitive flexibility lead to problems with switching from one strategy to another.

Conversation therapies employing video for feedback and to facilitate outcome measurement are increasingly used with people with post-stroke aphasia and their conversation partners; however the evidence base for change in everyday interaction remains limited. We investigated the effect of Better Conversations with Aphasia (BCA), an intervention that is freely available online at https://extend.ucl.ac.uk/. Eight people with chronic agrammatic aphasia, and their regular conversation partners participated in the tailored 8 week program involving significant video feedback. We explored changes in: (i) conversation facilitators (such as multi-modal turns by people with aphasia); and (ii) conversation barriers (such as use of test questions by conversation partners). The outcome of intervention was evaluated directly by measuring change in video-recorded everyday conversations. The study employed a pre-post design with multiple 5 minute samples of conversation before and after intervention, scored by trained raters blind to the point of data collection. Group level analysis showed no significant increase in conversation facilitators. There was, however, a significant reduction in the number of conversation barriers. The case series data revealed variability in conversation behaviors across occasions for the same dyad and between different dyads. Specifically, post-intervention there was a significant increase in facilitator behaviors for two dyads, a decrease for one and no significant change for five dyads. There was a significant decrease in barrier behaviors for five dyads and no significant change for three dyads. The reduction in barrier behaviors was considerable; on average change from over eight to fewer than three barrier behaviors in 5 minutes of conversation. The pre-post design has the limitation of no comparison group. However, change occurs in targeted conversational behaviors and in people with chronic aphasia and their partners. The findings suggest change can occur after eight therapy sessions and have implications for clinical practice. A reduction in barrier behaviors may be easier to obtain, although the controlled case series results demonstrate a significant increase in conversation facilitators is also possible. The rehabilitation tool is available online and video technology was central to delivering intervention and evaluating change.

This paper investigates the grammatical difficulties of an English-speaking person with non-fluent aphasia using clinical assessments based on picture description and story telling. The same individual's conversation grammar, which was investigated in detail in a linked article is reviewed here, and the notion that interactional grammatical phenomena may not necessarily be visible in elicited language data is explored. Data analysis shows that the aphasic speaker's grammar looks considerably different in the context of clinical assessment than it does in conversation. Analysis of elicited grammar reveals that the majority of utterances produced are subject-verb-object (SVO) type sentences, whereas prior analysis of conversation data indicated patterns of interactional grammatical phenomena that differ from such sentence types. It is suggested that language tests and conversation provide complementary but essentially different information about grammatical abilities. The clinical implications of this finding are discussed.