No abstract

Background: Communication between people with aphasia and their healthcare professionals (HCPs) can be greatly improved when HCPs are trained in using supportive conversation techniques and tools. Communication partner training (CPT) is an umbrella term that covers a range of interventions that train the conversation partners of people with aphasia. Several CPT interventions for HCPs have been developed and used to support HCPs to interact successfully with people with aphasia. Aims:The objective of this study was to identify the mechanisms of change as a result of a Dutch CPT intervention, named CommuniCare, in order to evaluate and optimise the intervention. Methods & procedures:A total of 254 HCPs from five different healthcare centres received CommuniCare. An explorative qualitative research design was chosen. Two interviews were conducted with 24 HCPs directly after and 4 months after receiving the training that was part of CommuniCare. Two conceptual frameworks were used to deductively code the interviews. HCPs' perspectives were coded into a four-part sequence following CIMO logic: the self-reported use of supportive conversation techniques or tools pre-intervention (Context), the intervention elements (Intervention) that evoked certain mechanisms (Mechanisms), resulting in the self-reported use of supportive conversation techniques and tools post-intervention (Outcomes). The Capabilities Opportunities Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model was used to fill in the Mechanisms component.Outcomes & results: Three themes were identified to describe the mechanisms of change that led to an increase in the use of supportive conversation techniques and tools. According to HCPs, (i) information, videos, e-learning modules, role-play, feedback during training and coaching on the job increased their psychological capabilities; (ii) information and role-play increased their automatic motivations; and (iii) information, videos and role-play increased their reflective 1190

Background. There is an increasing amount of research that investigates the needs and wishes of people with aphasia and their relatives with regards to improving the accessibility of communication with healthcare professionals (HCP). An important way to improve this is by training HCP to use supportive conversation techniques and tools.Objectives. This study aimed to inform the development of such a training, by adding to previous findings in the literature regarding the experiences, needs and wishes of people with aphasia and their relatives. We were interested in their experiences with the accessibility of communication and support from HCP and how they believed this can be improved.Methods. An exploratory qualitative research design was chosen. Data was collected through qualitative semi-structured interviews with 20 people with aphasia and 12 relatives. The time post stroke ranged from 3 months to 41 years.Results. Four themes described the data. According to people with aphasia and relatives (1) information transfer in healthcare settings and (2) the use of supported conversation techniques by HCP are inadequate, (3) there is a lack of shared decision-making in healthcare settings, and (4) support, guidance, counseling and education is mainly targeted at the person with aphasia. Conclusions.People with aphasia and relatives reported a variety of positive and negative experiences in all themes. Even though guidelines and interventions have been developed to improve healthcare for people with aphasia and their relatives, we found that people still encounter substantial challenges in access to-and provision of information, shared decisionmaking, support and communication with HCP. The findings in this study provide some important recommendations for improvement, including the improvement of transfer of information, shared decision-making and individual support for the relatives.

No abstract

Background: Subjective well-being (SWB) and quality of life (QOL) are intricately related constructs. Recent research shows both constructs share some facets, but are distinct entities. It is unclear, both internationally and in the Netherlands, if and how SLTs address SWB in clinical practice. The current study was set up to explore Dutch SLTs' perceptions of SWB in relation to the management of people with aphasia. Aims: To describe how Dutch SLTs, working with people with aphasia in a private practice or a healthcare setting, address patient's SWB during diagnosis and treatment, and to identify barriers and facilitators they experience when addressing SWB. Methods & Procedures: A qualitative research design with a phenomenological approach was used. SLTs from private practices and healthcare settings were invited to participate in individual interviews and a focus group. The data were analysed thematically using a combination of inductive and deductive methods.Outcomes & Results: Eight SLTs participated in the study. The SLTs' experiences were captured in four themes that emerged from the data: (1) SWB is a multifaceted concept and depends on patient-specific factors: premorbid factors, life priorities and time post-stroke; (2) SLTs experience more responsibility for patients' SWB than their profession allows; (3) collaboration between SLTs and patients, patients' network and other healthcare professionals is required to address SWB during diagnosis and treatment; and (4) misinterpretations are inevitable when SLTs or the patients' network address patients' SWB. Conclusions & Implications:The results showed that SLTs feel responsible for addressing SWB in the management of people with aphasia. Their perception of the concept of SWB is similar to the definition used in the literature and is multifaceted. They feel responsible for the part of SWB that is related to communicative functioning, but less so for the more heuristic aspects of SWB. This is related to their experienced limitation of influence on SWB, which for some leaves them feeling out of depth and uncertain about boundaries between professionals. Addressing SWB in a multidisciplinary team is therefore considered important in order to adequately and fully capture someone's SWB and reduce to clinicians' experienced burden and responsibility.