Background Multiple factors can influence the working alliance and treatment outcome in speech and language therapy. The ‘working alliance’ is an important concept in treatment and can be described as the degree to which a treatment dyad is engaged in collaborative, purposive work. To date, relatively little attention has been paid to this concept within speech and language treatment in general, and within stuttering treatment research in particular. Aims To investigate the role of the working alliance within stuttering treatment, and to evaluate whether the quality of the working alliance correlated with clients’ concept of motivation and treatment outcomes 6 months post‐therapy. Methods & Procedures Eighteen adults (21‐61 years) participated in this multiple single‐case treatment study, with treatment facilitated by an experienced speech and language therapist. The working alliance was investigated using the Working Alliance Inventory—Short Version Revised (WAI‐SR), an Extended version of the Client Preferences for Stuttering Treatment (CPST‐E), the Overall Assessment of Speakers’ Experience of Stuttering—Adult version (OASES‐A), the Wright & Ayre Stuttering Self‐Rating Profile (WASSP) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Outcomes & Results Analyses demonstrated significant associations between the working alliance and client motivation (r = 0.781) and treatment outcomes (r = 0.644) 6 months post‐treatment. The association between client‐led goals and therapy tasks appeared particularly important. Conclusions & Implications : The working alliance between speech and language therapists and persons who stutter matters. Within the alliance, the level of client–clinician agreement on treatment goals and therapy tasks may be of greater importance than the bond between client and clinician. Further research with greater numbers of participants is warranted.

First and foremost, I am thankful to all the persons with aphasia who participated in the study for spending a significant amount of time with their speech and language pathologists; for their motivation to finish this intensive training program; and for their helpful feedback and comments throughout and after the intervention period. I would also like to acknowledge the significant others of those persons with aphasia for their support and participation. This study would not have been possible without the outstanding work of the involved speech and language pathologists. They showed such a personal interest in the method that they were willing to increase their already heavy workloads by carrying out the CILTprogram in their hospital settings to collect data for this study. Thank you so much. Further, I am grateful to the hospitals and rehabilitation institutions involved that cooperated by letting me introduce CILT and sample participants. I am also grateful to the members of the multitude of professional teams for cooperating with participants' needs, timetables, and challenges specific to the early rehabilitation setting. This doctoral study would not have been accomplished without the support of my two supervisors, Professor Lynn M. Maher (University of Houston, USA) and Professor Sol A.H. Lyster (University of Oslo, Norway). I am deeply grateful for having had the opportunity to have Professor Lynn M. Maher as my main supervisor, who opened her heart, home, and research to a rather unknown Norwegian student. Professor Maher encouraged my ideas and work; she introduced me to an international network in the field of aphasiology, and communication with her substantially improved my professional English. Thanks to the modern technology of email and cell phones, the large geographical distance was not a barrier to cooperation ; however, time differences did present a challenge. Professor Sol A.H. Lyster deserves equal thanks for being my internal supervisor at the Department for Special Needs Education. Her straightforward comments were appreciated. Professor Lyster's knowledge of the faculty system and of the expectations for the doctoral study and thesis were of great value, especially during the final year. Scandinavian Studies, University of Oslo); Mari Berntsen (previously Sunnaas), and Line Haaland-Johansen, Ingvild Røste, Monica I.K. Knoph, and Eli Quenild of the Aphasia Team at Bredtvet Resource Centre for inspiration, discussion, and cooperation on research as well as work-related obligations. To all colleagues and friends, you deserve praise for your professional impact, and you have reminded me of the importance of having a social life in order to be able to produce meaningful research. Last, but not least, I am deeply grateful to my family for all of their support, from laminating hundreds of CILT cards to proofreading advice and heartwarming thoughtfulness throughout the PhD process. Thank you.

Objective: Pilot a definitive randomized controlled trial of speech-language telerehabilitation in poststroke aphasia in addition to usual care with regard to recruitment, drop-outs, and language effects. Design: Pilot single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Setting: Telerehabilitation delivered from tertiary rehabilitation center to participants at their home or admitted to secondary rehabilitation centers. Subjects: People with naming impairment due to aphasia following stroke. Intervention: Sixty-two participants randomly allocated to 5 hours of speech and language telerehabilitation by videoconference per week over four consecutive weeks together with usual care or usual care alone. The telerehabilitation targeted functional, expressive language. Main measures: Norwegian Basic Aphasia Assessment: naming (primary outcome), repetition, and auditory comprehension subtests; Verb and Sentence Test sentence production subtest and the Communicative Effectiveness Index at baseline, four weeks, and four months postrandomization. Data were analyzed by intention to treat. Results: No significant between-group differences were seen in naming or auditory comprehension in the Norwegian Basic Aphasia Assessment at four weeks and four months post randomization. The telerehabilitation group ( n = 29) achieved a Norwegian Basic Aphasia Assessment repetition score of 8.9 points higher ( P = 0.026) and a Verb and Sentence Test score 3 points higher ( P = 0.002) than the control group ( n = 27) four months postrandomization. Communicative Effectiveness Index was not significantly different between groups, but increased significantly within both groups. No adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Augmented telerehabilitation via videoconference may be a viable rehabilitation model for aphasia affecting language outcomes poststroke. A definitive trial with 230 participants is needed to confirm results.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Post-stroke aphasia is a communication disorder where existing evidence favors intensive therapy methods. Telerehabilitation represents a service model for geographically remote settings, or other barriers to clinic attendance or to facilitate an augmentation of therapy across a continuum of care. Evidence to support efficiency, feasibility, and acceptability is however still scarce. Appraising aphasia telerehabilitation in controlled trials beyond its effectiveness, by investigating feasibility and acceptability, may facilitate implementation into clinical practice. Methods: In our pilot randomized controlled trial, we investigated the feasibility and acceptability of speech and language therapy by videoconference, in addition to usual care, in people with aphasia following stroke. To improve functional, expressive language, a tailored intervention was given 1 h per day, five times per week over four consecutive weeks. Feasibility measures included evaluation of technical setup using diary logs. Acceptability was investigated by examining adherence and satisfaction with therapy alongside evaluation of data safety and privacy. Results: Feasibility and acceptability data were collected in relation to 556.5 h of telerehabilitation delivered to 30 participants over a 2-years intervention period by three speech-language pathologists. Protocol adherence was high, with a tolerable technical fault rate; 86 faults were registered over 541 video sessions. Most (80%; n = 30) of the participants experienced zero to three faults. The main cause of technical failures was flawed internet connection, causing delayed or interrupted therapy. Total satisfaction with telerehabilitation was rated good or very good by 93.1% (n = 29) of participants and two of three speech-language pathologists. Within a moderate variance of technical failure, participants experiencing more faults were more satisfied. No serious events regarding security and privacy were reported. Our model is feasibly and ready to be implemented across a range of clinical settings and contexts. Øra et al. Feasibility of Aphasia Telerehabilitation Conclusions: Synchronous telerehabilitation for post-stroke aphasia is feasible and acceptable and shows tolerable technical fault rates with high satisfaction among patients and pathologists. Within a low rate of faults, satisfaction was not negatively influenced by fault frequency. Access to clinical and technical expertise is needed when developing telerehabilitation services. Telerehabilitation may be a viable service delivery model for aphasia rehabilitation.

Non-pharmacological interventions for stuttering in children six years and younger (Review)

BackgroundThe Cochrane review on the effectiveness of speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke suggests intensity of therapy is a key predictor for outcome. Current aphasia services cannot provide intervention at the intensity observed within trial contexts because of resource limitations. Telerehabilitation could widen access to speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in geographically remote contexts and reduce the time spent on travel by the therapist and patient. The current academic literature within this field is in its infancy, with few trials of speech and language therapy (SLT) delivered by videoconference. Our pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) will explore feasibility aspects and effectiveness of telerehabilitation for aphasia in addition to standard SLT.Method/designOur study is a pragmatic, exploratory, pilot randomized controlled trial, where participants will be randomized to a telerehabilitation group or a control group. Both groups receive standard SLT (usual care) but the telerehabilitation group receives an additional 5 h of telerehabilitation per week over 4 weeks through videoconference. This additional telerehabilitation focuses on spoken language with an emphasis on word naming. We aim to include 40 patients in each group, with inclusion criteria being aphasia any time post stroke. Participants will be assessed blindly at pre-randomization (baseline), and 4 weeks and 4 months after randomization. The primary endpoint is naming ability 3 months after the completed intervention, measured by the Norwegian Basic Aphasia Assessment (NGA) naming subtest. Secondary endpoints include other subtests of the NGA, the VAST (Verb and Sentence Test) subtest sentence production, Communicative Effectiveness Index (CETI) and the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life scale (SAQOL-39). Experiences of patients and SLPs with telerehabilitation are assessed using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Statistical between group comparisons will be in line with an intention-to-treat analysis.DiscussionThis pilot RCT of intensive language training by videoconference will contribute new scientific evidence to the field of aphasia telerehabilitation. Here, we describe our trial which will explore the feasibility of telerehabilitation for aphasia as an intervention, our choice of primary and secondary outcome measures and proposed analyses. Our trial will provide information for the development and delivery of future definitive RCTs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02768922. Registered on 11 May 2016. Last updated on 17 November 2017.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2588-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.