Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test (FAST)

Enderby,; Wood, Wood; Wade,

doi:10.4324/9781003076391-56

Cited by 14 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several tools scored high on psychometric properties, for instance, assessment scales for pain including Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) Pain Scale (FLACC) [16], Nonverbal Pain Scale (NVPS) [27], Behavioural Pain Scale (BPS) [24] and Discomfort Scale - Dementia for Alzheimer Type (DS DAT) [20]. Other tools scoring good included tests for aphasia and spoken language; Emory Dyssemia Index, ASHA Functional Assessment of Communication Skills (ASHA FACS) [11], Communication Effectiveness Index [28], Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test [30] and Porch Index of Communicative Ability [31]. One tool specifically focussed on nonverbal communication was the Facial Action Coding System for measuring facial expression which also managed to score towards higher end.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Nonverbal Communication Tools for Use in Dementia

Khan

Eno-Amooquaye

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionNon-verbal communication remains a relatively unexplored area in dementia care with a lack of validated assessment tools available to measure non-verbal communication function in dementia.MethodsThis scoping review identifies assessment scales of nonverbal communication in dementia and evaluates the psychometric properties and clinical utility of these instruments. Relevant publications in English, from 1947 to 2017, were identified through an extensive search strategy in Medline, Psychinfo and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, Cochrane and generic search engines (Google) and available off-line resources. Quality judgement criteria was formulated and used to evaluate the psychometric aspects of the scales.ResultsForty-one tools were identified measuring various communication channels including verbal, nonverbal (e.g., facial expressions, gestures, eye contact) and functional, communication means; within various settings and populations, for instance, those assessing cognition and verbal language difficulties secondary to stroke, aphasia and nonverbal cues associated with pain. A number of tools presented psychometrics qualities; only nine of the forty-one tools specifically focussed on nonverbal communication, however, comprehensive assessment of nonverbal communication function was not presented in majority of the identified tools. Two tools provided a detailed assessment of nonverbal communication, the Emory dyssemia Index (EDI) and the Threadgold Communication Tool (TCT).ConclusionBased on the psychometric qualities and criteria regarding sensitivity and clinical utility, we concluded that although it is difficult to recommend one particular tool, the EDI and TCT are the most appropriate scales currently available. Further research should focus on improving these scales by further testing their validity, reliability and clinical utility in dementia.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Nonverbal Communication Tools for Use in Dementia

Khan

Eno-Amooquaye

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This assessment included use of the Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test (FAST) (Enderby et al . 2012) as a consistent assessment framework. FAST test items were supplemented with a ‘yes/no’ reliability subtest and a photograph recognition subtest in order to generate the same types of outcomes as the novel screening tool.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As existing validated communication screening tools do not measure the same outcomes as this novel tool (i.e., they do not test the ability to use compensatory strategies), a communication assessment completed by an SLT (the first author) was used as the criterion variable. This assessment included use of the Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test (FAST) (Enderby et al 2012) as a consistent assessment framework. FAST test items were supplemented with a 'yes/no' reliability subtest and a photograph recognition subtest in order to generate the same types of outcomes as the novel screening tool.…”

Section: Assessment Of Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Giving voice to people with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments

Jayes

Palmer

Enderby

2020

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Healthcare professionals without specialist training in communication disorders may not know how to identify and support patients with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. To meet this need, a novel communication screening tool was developed and tested as part of a mental capacity assessment support toolkit. Aims: To provide an initial evaluation of the communication screening tool's usability, interrater reliability and criterion validity. Methods & Procedures: A prototype communication screening tool was developed iteratively using co-production and user-centred design principles. A mixed-methods case series design was used to explore how multidisciplinary healthcare professionals used the tool to test patients in acute hospital and intermediate care settings. Usability data were collected in an electronic survey and from a documentary analysis. Screening test outcomes obtained by pairs of professionals were compared to measure the tool's interrater reliability. Outcomes obtained by professionals were compared with the outcomes of a speech and language therapist's communication assessment to measure criterion validity. Quantitative data were analysed using frequency counts and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis. Outcomes & Results: A total of 21 professionals, including physicians, nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and speech and language therapists, and 17 patients with diagnoses of stroke or cognitive impairment took part. Professionals reported they found the tool easy to use, useful and that its use increased their understanding of communication support methods and the speech and language therapist role in relation to mental capacity assessment. However, not all used it consistently or accurately. Professionals reported they chose not to use the tool when they perceived patients' communication to be intact. Four of eight patients with a diagnosis of dementia or memory impairment, who professionals elected not to screen, were found to have significant communication needs. Screening outcome data for nine patients suggest the tool's interrater reliability is currently moderate, whilst its criterion validity is poor. Conclusions & Implications: This study highlights that non-speech and language therapist health professionals have difficulty identifying and screening for communication difficulties. This confirms existing evidence that people with communication disabilities may not receive the decision-making support they require during mental capacity assessments when speech and language therapists are not involved. Greater understanding of health professionals' thought processes regarding communication is required to further develop this unique communication screening tool so that it can effectively enable healthcare professionals to identify and use communicative adaptations to support decision-making.

show abstract

“…Participants include patients with acute stroke and aphasia screened using the shortened Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test. 3 Participants are identified, recruited, randomized, and assessed within 14 days of stroke. Therapy commences the day after this assessment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the Very Early Rehabilitation in Speech (VERSE) after stroke trial: an international 3-arm clinical trial to determine the effectiveness of early, intensive, prescribed, direct aphasia therapy

Godecke

Rai

Cadilhac

et al. 2018

International Journal of Stroke

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Limited evidence exists to support very early intensive aphasia rehabilitation after stroke. VERSE is a PROBE trial designed to determine whether two types of intensive aphasia therapy, beginning within 14 days of acute stroke, provide greater therapeutic and cost-effectiveness than usual care. Objective To publish the detailed statistical analysis plan for the VERSE trial prior to unblinding. This statistical analysis plan was based on the published and registered VERSE trial protocol and was developed by the blinded steering committee and management team, led by the trial statistician. This plan was developed using outcome measures and trial data collection forms. Results The VERSE statistical analysis plan is consistent with reporting standards for clinical trials and provides for clear and open reporting. Conclusions Publication of a statistical analysis plan serves to reduce potential trial reporting bias and outlines transparent pre-specified analyses. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) Registration number: ACTRN12613000776707; Universal Trial Number (UTN) is U1111-1145-4130.

show abstract

Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test (FAST)

Cited by 14 publications

References 1 publication

Identification of Nonverbal Communication Tools for Use in Dementia

Identification of Nonverbal Communication Tools for Use in Dementia

Giving voice to people with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments

Statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the Very Early Rehabilitation in Speech (VERSE) after stroke trial: an international 3-arm clinical trial to determine the effectiveness of early, intensive, prescribed, direct aphasia therapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About