AAC strategies for people with primary progressive aphasia without dementia: two case studies

Cress, Cynthia J.; King, Julia M.

doi:10.1080/07434619912331278785

Cited by 35 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cress and King (1999) reported a number of benefits of the AAC approaches introduced with participant CE. Using a receptive communication board, CE was able to comprehend around 70% of the necessary routine messages his family wished to communicate.…”

Section: Activity/participation-directed Intervention Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impairment‐ and activity/participation‐directed interventions in progressive language impairment: Clinical and theoretical issues

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Activity/participation-directed Intervention Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impairment‐ and activity/participation‐directed interventions in progressive language impairment: Clinical and theoretical issues

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In addition to these impairment-focused studies, a more functional approach was described by Cress and King (1999). They present the cases of two individuals with NPA where an augmentative and alternative communication intervention was implemented.…”

Section: Anomia In Nonfluent Progressive Aphasiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Relearning lost vocabulary in nonfluent progressive aphasia with MossTalk Words®

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The literature on aphasia has been growing rapidly, with reports of different therapeutic approaches for a post-stroke anomia. While individuals with poststroke anomia frequently recover to some extent, the other end of the aphasia recovery continuum is occupied by those who experience relentless language dissolution as a result of progressive disorders such as primary progressive aphasia. One of the most recent additions to the field of aphasia rehabilitation is therapy whereby either part of or the entire therapy is administered via computer-based programmes. There have been few treatment studies investigating the rehabilitation of language abilities in people with primary progressive aphasia (PPA). Aims: The objectives of this investigation were to examine the ability of PPA individuals to relearn lost words and to determine the extent of benefits derived from MossTalk WordsH, a computer-based treatment for anomia. Methods and Procedures: Using a multiple baseline across behaviours design, we explored treatment-specific effects, maintenance, and generalisation of improvements derived from this therapy programme. Two participants with nonfluent PPA were treated, each on three lists of words for which low and stable baselines were first established. Sessions occurred two to three times a week. Treatment involved the presentation of a picture on the computer screen, with the participants being required to name it. Success in treatment was measured by probing list naming every second session. Once a participant attained 80% accuracy over two consecutive probes, or participated in 12 sessions (whichever occurred first), treatment of a list was terminated and the next

show abstract

“…43 Six studies were rated as Class III, consisting of results obtained from one or more single-cases and that used appropriate single-subject methods with adequate quantification and analysis of results. The level of evidence of one functional intervention 46 could not be established due to absence of reliable methodological control to determine treatment effects. One study was rated as Class II and consisted of a nonrandomized casecontrol investigation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Lexical Retrieval Cascade Treatment on Naming and Discourse of Individuals with Logopenic Variant of Primary Progressive Aphasia (lvPPA)

Kim

2017

Clin Arch Commun Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. This study provided a systematic review on nonpharmacological interventions applied to patients diagnosed with Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA) and its variants: Semantic (SPPA), Nonfluent (NFPPA) and Logopenic (LPPA) to establish evidence-based recommendations for the clinical practice of cognitive rehabilitation for these patients. Methods: A PubMed and LILACS literature search with no time restriction was conducted with the keywords PPA (and its variants) AND rehabilitation OR training OR intervention OR therapy OR treatment OR effectiveness. To develop its evidence-based recommendations, a research committee identified questions to be addressed and determined the level of evidence for each study according to published criteria (Cicerone et al., 2000). Overall evidence for treatments was summarized and recommendations were derived. Results: Our search retrieved articles published from 1995 to 2013: 21 for SPPA, 8 for NFPPA, 3 for LPPA and 8 for PPA with no specification. Thirty-five studies were rated as Class III, consisting of studies with results obtained from one or more single-cases and that used appropriate single-subject methods with adequate quantification and analysis of results. The level of evidence of three functional interventions could not be established. One study was rated as Class II and consisted of a nonrandomized case-control investigation. Conclusion: Positive results were reported in all reviewed studies. However, in order to be recommended, some investigation regarding the intervention efficacy was required.Results of the present review allows for recommendation of some nonpharmacological interventions for cognitive deficits following PPA as Practice Options. Suggestions for further studies on PPA interventions and future research are discussed. Key words: primary progressive aphasia, treatment, speech and language therapy, intervention, cognitive rehabilitation. Este estudo ofereceu uma revisão sistemática de intervenções não-farmacológicas aplicadas a pacientes com Afasia Progressiva Primária (APP) e suas variantes: Semântica (APPS), Não-fluente (APPNF) e Logopênica (APPL) com o objetivo de estabelecer recomendações baseadas em evidências para a prática clínica de reabilitação cognitiva para estes pacientes. Métodos: Conduziu-se busca por literatura, sem restrição de período, no PubMed e LILACS com as palavraschave PPA (e variantes) AND rehabilitation OR training OR intervention OR therapy OR treatment OR effectiveness. Para desenvolver recomendações baseadas em evidências um comitê de pesquisadores identificou as questões relevantes para investigação e determinou o nível de evidência para cada estudo de acordo com critérios publicados (Cicerone et al., 2000). A evidência total para os tratamentos foi sumarizada e recomendações redigidas.

show abstract

AAC strategies for people with primary progressive aphasia without dementia: two case studies

Cited by 35 publications

References 14 publications

Impairment‐ and activity/participation‐directed interventions in progressive language impairment: Clinical and theoretical issues

Impairment‐ and activity/participation‐directed interventions in progressive language impairment: Clinical and theoretical issues

Relearning lost vocabulary in nonfluent progressive aphasia with MossTalk Words®

Effect of Lexical Retrieval Cascade Treatment on Naming and Discourse of Individuals with Logopenic Variant of Primary Progressive Aphasia (lvPPA)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About