Non-pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia: a network meta-analysis

Roheger, Mandy; Riemann, Steffen; Grittner, Ulrike; Flöel, Agnes; Meinzer, Marcus

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd015067

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This, in turn, would indicate which data should be extracted from which studies in future meta-analyses. Cotelli et al (2020) and Nissim et al (2020) have already reported meta-analyses of spoken and written naming treatment outcomes following behavioral treatment with and without tDCS; and Roheger et al (2021) have published a protocol for a review of word retrieval and quality of life outcomes in PPA as part of the Cochrane Collaboration. With regard to the wide range of other interventions not targeting lexical retrieval, the Volkmer et al (2020a) systematic review commented on the impossibility of aggregating data from studies with incommensurate outcome measures, and the same difficulties would apply to this review.…”

Section: Characterization Of Treatment Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral Treatment for Speech and Language in Primary Progressive Aphasia and Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech: A Systematic Review

Wauters,

Croot,

Dial

et al. 2023

Neuropsychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS) are neurodegenerative syndromes characterized by progressive decline in language or speech. There is a growing number of studies investigating speech-language interventions for PPA/PPAOS. An updated systematic evaluation of the treatment evidence is warranted to inform best clinical practice and guide future treatment research. We systematically reviewed the evidence for behavioral treatment for speech and language in this population. Reviewed articles were published in peer-reviewed journals through 31 May 2021. We evaluated level of evidence, reporting quality, and risk of bias using a modified version of the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA) Levels of Evidence, an appraisal point system, additional reporting quality and internal/external validity items, and, as appropriate, the Single Case Experimental DesignScale or the Physiotherapy Evidence Database – PsycBITERating Scale for Randomized and Non-Randomized Controlled Trials. Results were synthesized using quantitative summaries and narrative review. A total of 103 studies reported treatment outcomes for 626 individuals with PPA; no studies used the diagnostic label PPAOS. Most studies evaluated interventions for word retrieval. The highest-quality evidence was provided by 45 experimental and quasi-experimental studies (16 controlled group studies, 29 single-subject designs). All (k = 45/45) reported improvement on a primary outcome measure; most reported generalization (k = 34/43), maintenance (k = 34/39), or social validity (k = 17/19) of treatment for at least one participant. The available evidence supports speech-language intervention for persons with PPA; however, treatment for PPAOS awaits systematic investigation. Implications and limitations of the evidence and the review are discussed.

show abstract