Drawing Together: Evaluation Of A Therapy Programme For Severe Aphasia

Sacchett, C; Byng, Sally; Marshall, Jane; Pound, Carole

doi:10.1080/136828299247414

Cited by 68 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Members of minorities also have been found to have greater difficulty reintegrating into the community and finding employment after brain injury. Cultural differences related to brain injury outcome and process of care have been studied in other countries, such as Australia, in which diverse indigenous cultures have been shown to experience greater difficulties in social integration, return to work, and physical and cognitive independence, separate from SES and accessibility to services (Saltapidas and Ponsford, 2007). Thus, minority populations appear to be at greater risk for reduced rehabilitative outcomes following brain injury, and ethnic/cultural background is included in the AOC inventory.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambient Experience in Restitutive Treatment of Aphasia

McClung¹,

Rothi²,

Nadeau³

2010

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the greatest challenges to language rehabilitation is reconciling the fact that the same therapeutic intervention, provided to different individuals with similar types of stroke-induced aphasia, may result in divergent outcomes. In this paper, the authors reviewed existing literature to identify relevant ambient factors – those outside the control of the clinician – that may potentially influence functional language recovery in aphasia and response to treatment. The goal was to develop a clinical history-taking tool to assist clinicians in gathering information germane to each individual's unique circumstances and environment, elements that may have previously been underestimated, to provide a complete inventory of potentially potent prognostic factors. First, two of the authors, speech–language pathologists experienced in aphasia rehabilitation, identified and categorized factors that seemed likely to influence aphasia outcomes. Then, a wide range of literature was reviewed in an effort to identify factors empirically found to be potent influences on aphasia recovery. Where studies relating these factors to aphasia were not found, relevant research from allied fields that examined recovery from brain injury is reported. Moreover, some factors thought to be potentially potent have yet to be examined. Finally, the ambient factors supported by evidence were categorized as facilitators or barriers to functional improvement, and the Ambient Influences on Outcome Checklist (AOC) was developed, including only those factors shown to be potent in the recovery process. It is hoped that this checklist can be used to more broadly assess potential prognostic influences in aphasia restitution, as well as spawn further research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambient Experience in Restitutive Treatment of Aphasia

McClung¹,

Rothi²,

Nadeau³

2010

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lyon (1995) pointed out the superiority of drawing as a type of AAC because the drawn picture provides a permanent record, in contrast to gestures or pantomimes. For these reasons, using drawing to facilitate communication is often introduced in speech therapy for aphasia (Davis, 2005; Sacchett et al., 1999; Wallace, 2018; Wallace et al., 2014; Jeannene & Marjorie 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics of drawing deficits in people with aphasia: Differences between symbolic and realistic drawn objects

Komori,

Hashimoto,

Jinushi

et al. 2023

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPictures drawn by people with aphasia (PWA) are often more challenging to understand than those drawn by healthy people. There are two types of objects: those that tend to be drawn symbolically (symbolically drawn objects—SOs) and those that are likely to be drawn realistically (realistically drawn objects—ROs).AimsTo compare the identification rate and number of misunderstanding types between SOs and ROs drawn by PWA and healthy controls (HCs). To reveal trends in the misunderstandings of drawings by PWA, and to identify the language or cognitive abilities related to the identification rate of pictures drawn by PWA.Methods & ProceduresWe designed a drawing task involving SOs and ROs. A total of 18 PWA and 30 HCs completed the task, and respondents identified the drawings. The identification rate and number of misunderstandings were analysed with two‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) including group (PWA and HCs) and object type (SOs and ROs). The misunderstandings were divided into four categories varying in semantic and morphological similarity; these ratios were examined with a chi‐square test. The relationships of language and cognitive abilities with the identification rate were investigated with multiple regression analyses.Outcomes & ResultsThere was a significant effect of the interaction between group and object type on the identification rate (F(1.1387) = 3.90, Mean Squared Error (MSE) = 4139.67, p = 0.04): the identification rates for ROs were lower in the PWA than in the HCs. For the number of misunderstanding types, an interaction was observed between group and object type (F(1.56) = 8.26, MSE = 26.93, p < 0.01): the number of misunderstanding types for ROs in the PWA was greater than that in the HCs. The misunderstanding patterns differed between ROs and SOs (χ2(3) = 694.30, p < 0.001, V = 0.37). ROs were semantically related, whereas SOs were morphologically related. The identification rates of ROs and SOs were correlated only with Kanji writing scores (ROs: β = 3.66, p = 0.01; SOs: β = 6.57, p < 0.01).Conclusions & ImplicationsIn drawings by the PWA, SOs had a higher identification rate, while ROs had a lower identification rate and a greater variety of misunderstandings. SOs may increase drawing motivation. Interventions to improve the identifiability of SOs and ROs should reflect each character. Identification rates were correlated only with Kanji writing scores. The PWA, whose native language was Japanese and had preserved Kanji writing abilities, and their communication abilities may be increased through drawing.What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subject PWA often have impaired drawing abilities and draw pictures that third parties misinterpret. Some objects tend to be drawn symbolically, and some are drawn realistically. However, it is not clear whether there is a difference between these types of drawings depicted by PWA in identifiability and the tendency to be misunderstood by ordinary people. In addition, the relationships between language or cognitive abilities and the identification rate of drawn pictures are not clear.What this paper adds to the existing knowledge The identification rate differed between SOs and ROs. In drawings by PWA, SOs had a higher identification rate, while ROs had a lower identification rate and the greatest variety of misunderstandings. Approximately half of the misunderstandings were related to the target object. SOs tended to be confused with morphologically related objects, while ROs tended to be confused with semantically related objects. Identification rates were correlated only with Kanji writing scores.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? To motivate PWA's drawing, it is suitable to begin with SOs. Examining drawing ability from the perspective of SOs and ROs increases the chance of identifying drawing ability. PWA whose native language is Japanese and have preserved Kanji writing abilities may be able to increase their communication abilities through drawing.

show abstract

“…Included studies mapped to the four theme aims Treatment aims Studies from review Skills training and self-efficacy Behn et al (2019a), Behn et al (2019b), Behn et al (2021a), Behn et al (2021b), Cairns (2007), Cherney et al (2011), Feeney and Capo (2010), Goldblum (2010), Hoepner et al (2022), Howell et al (2021), Purves et al (2011), Sacchett and Lindsay (2007), Sarno and Chambers (1997), Thomas (2004), Walker et al (2005), and Ylvisaker et al (2007) Advocacy and self-empowerment Hoepner et al (2022), Ylvisaker et al (2007), Feeney and Capo (2010), Cherney et al (2011), Goldblum (2010), Purves et al (2011), and Sacchett and Lindsay (2007) Emotional well-being and quality of life Behn et al (2019a), Behn et al (2019b), Behn et al (2021a), Behn et al (2021b),Cairns (2007),Cherney et al (2011), Feeney andCapo (2010),Mumby and Whitworth (2012),Sacchett and Lindsay (2007),Sarno and Chambers (1997),Thomas (2004), and Walker et al (2005) Collaboration and community belonging Behn et al (2019a), Behn et al (2019b), Behn et al (2021a), Behn et al (2021b), Feeney and Capo (2010), Ylvisaker et al (2007), Sarno and Chambers (1997), Howell et al (2021), Walker et al (2005), Thomas (2004), Mumby and Whitworth (2012), Cherney et al (2011), Goldblum (2010), Purves et al (2011), and Hoepner et al (2022)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Core components of project‐based intervention after acquired brain injury: Delivering meaningful groups online

Behn

Hoepner

Meulenbroek

et al. 2022

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRehabilitation for cognitive‐communication impairments following brain injury can be complex given the heterogenous nature of impairments post injury. Project‐based intervention has the potential to improve communication skills and create a meaningful real‐life context where individuals collaborate to develop a concrete product, which benefits others. While evidence for this intervention is emerging, the COVID‐19 pandemic prompted increased use of telehealth interventions to serve people with brain injury. This paper aims to describe a framework for the delivery of project‐based intervention via telehealth within community rehabilitation settings; and present several case studies of telehealth groups completed in the United Kingdom and the United States during the COVID‐19 pandemic.MethodsA working group was formed to map the components of project‐based intervention onto the rehabilitation treatment specification system (RTSS). This system is a conceptual framework that helps to explain the link between treatment theory and ingredients, allowing a clinician to clearly understand how and why a treatment works. First, a literature search was completed to identify eligible studies on project‐based intervention after brain injury. Second, those studies were thematically mapped onto the RTSS to identify important intervention components. Third, the presence of these components was assessed for community brain injury groups delivered via telehealth in the United Kingdom and United States. These groups were further described using a taxonomy of social activities that help to describe the degree of meaningful social engagement.ResultsThe literature was described with a thematic RTSS summary. Treatment aims focus on skills training and self‐efficacy, advocacy and self‐empowerment, emotional well‐being and quality of life, and collaboration and community belonging. Treatment ingredients involve a range of cognitive and behavioural supports to deliver meaningful activities and contexts to complete a project. Mechanisms of action involve learning by doing and cognitive and affective information processing. All four telehealth groups conducted in the United Kingdom and United States involved at least three treatment aims, >7 targets, and >8 treatment ingredients. All groups reported positive experiences from activities that involve working collaboratively to help others and contribute to society.ConclusionsProject‐based intervention delivered via telehealth has the potential for supporting people with acquired brain injury to improve their communication skills and engage in meaningful, collaborative activity. Application of the RTSS helps clinicians to understand the aims and therapeutic ingredients (or clinician activities) through which a person with brain injury may achieve specific treatment targets during the rehabilitation process.What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectProject‐based interventions have the potential to improve cognitive, self‐regulatory, behavioural and social communication skills, renegotiate identity and reaffirm sense of self, providing a positive impact on quality of life for persons with acquired brain injuries. Projects serve as a context for meaningful engagement for individuals in the chronic phase of traumatic brain injury recovery, without fulfilling work, family or social responsibilities. However, most published research has involved in‐person projects and few projects have been delivered via telehealth.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeWhile past published works have shared core principles of intervention, a variety of projects, durations, dosages and methods have been employed. The current paper provides a framework to support more consistent implementation. By mapping previous project‐based interventions to the RTSS, clinicians will have a better understanding of the aims, targets, ingredients and theoretical underpinnings of project‐based interventions. In the wake of the COVID‐19 pandemic, the shift to telehealth moved interventions to a virtual context. The four case projects in this paper demonstrate that it is possible to conduct project‐based interventions via telehealth and provides a clear description to guide clinicians in their delivery.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?This work begins to build the foundation for more rigorous, empirical examination of project‐based interventions. By mapping project‐based interventions to the RTSS, core aims, targets and ingredients are established that can be objectively examined. This investigation also provides a road map for clinicians who wish to implement this complex intervention.

show abstract

Drawing Together: Evaluation Of A Therapy Programme For Severe Aphasia

Cited by 68 publications

References 20 publications

Ambient Experience in Restitutive Treatment of Aphasia

Ambient Experience in Restitutive Treatment of Aphasia

Characteristics of drawing deficits in people with aphasia: Differences between symbolic and realistic drawn objects

Core components of project‐based intervention after acquired brain injury: Delivering meaningful groups online

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About