Treatment integrity of elaborated semantic feature analysis aphasia therapy delivered in individual and group settings

Kladouchou, Vasiliki; Papathanasiou, Ilias; Efstratiadou, Eva A.; Christaki, Vasiliki; Hilari, Katerina

doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12311

Cited by 8 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, one study was excluded as it evaluated treatment integrity of elaborated SFA (Kladouchou, Papathanasiou, Efstratiadou, Christaki & Hilari, 2017). An additional seven studies were excluded, as they were not research reports (Antonucci, 2014b;Bose & Buchman, 2007;Boyle, 2010;Durand & Ansaldo, 2014;Kiran & Bassetto, 2008;Maddy et al, 2014;van Hees, Mcmahon, Angwin, De Zubicaray, & Copland, 2014a).…”

Section: Study Selection: Screening and Data Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Semantic Feature Analysis Therapy Studies for Aphasia

Efstratiadou

Papathanasiou

Holland

et al. 2018

J Speech Lang Hear Res

Self Cite

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Study Selection: Screening and Data Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Semantic Feature Analysis Therapy Studies for Aphasia

Efstratiadou

Papathanasiou

Holland

et al. 2018

J Speech Lang Hear Res

Self Cite

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The adherence score for each session was calculated by dividing the number of checklist items present by the number of items expected (excluding items recorded as not applicable). 26 These scores were then converted to a percentage score. A score of 80% and above reflected a high level of treatment adherence.…”

Section: Analysis Of Adherencementioning

confidence: 99%

SUpporting wellbeing through PEeR-Befriending (SUPERB) feasibility trial: fidelity of peer-befriending for people with aphasia

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate systematically the fidelity of a peer-befriending intervention for people with aphasia.DesignSUpporting wellbeing through Peer-befriending (SUPERB) was a feasibility randomised controlled trial comparing usual care to usual care +peer-befriending. This paper reports on the fidelity of all intervention aspects (training and supervision of providers/befrienders; intervention visits) which was evaluated across all areas of the Behaviour Change Consortium framework.SettingCommunity.ParticipantsPeople with aphasia early poststroke and low levels of distress, randomised to the intervention arm of the trial (n=28); 10 peer-befrienders at least 1-year poststroke.InterventionPeer-befrienders were trained (4–6 hours); and received regular supervision (monthly group while actively befriending, and one-to-one as and when needed) in order to provide six 1-hour peer-befriending visits over 3 months.Main measuresMetrics included number and length of training, supervision sessions and visits. All training and supervision sessions and one (of six) visits per pair were rated against fidelity checklists and evaluated for inter-rater and intrarater reliability (Gwets AC1 agreement coefficient). Per-cent adherence to protocol was evaluated.ResultsAll peer-befrienders received 4–6 hours training over 2–3 days as intended. There were 25 group supervision sessions with a median number attended of 14 (IQR=8–18). Twenty-six participants agreed (92.8%) to the intervention and 21 (80.8%) received all six visits (median visit length 60 min). Adherence was high for training (91.7%–100%) and supervision (83%–100%) and moderate-to-high for befriending visits (66.7%–100%). Where calculable, inter-rater and intrarater reliability was high for training and supervision (Gwets AC1 >0.90) and moderate-to-high for intervention visits (Gwets AC1 0.44–1.0).ConclusionPlanning of fidelity processes at the outset of the trial and monitoring throughout was feasible and ensured good-to-high fidelity for this peer-befriending intervention. The results permit confidence in other findings from the SUPERB trial.Trial registration numberNCT02947776.

show abstract

“…EBP involves selecting interventions that are supported by the highest available evidence. When applying EBP, the clinician must be confident that such evidence is based on the faithful implementation of the treatment and not extraneous effects (see the arguments in Kaderavek and Justice 2010, Kladouchou et al 2017). Monitoring TF can also enable us to address questions that go beyond whether or not a ther-apy works.…”

Section: The Rationale For Ensuring Tfmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Treatment fidelity (TF) refers to the degree to which the delivery of core components of a treatment matches the delivery implementation guidelines; that is, the therapist's adherence to protocol (Kladouchou et al 2017). Different terms are used in the literature to describe TF, such as procedural reliability, implementation fidelity, treatment integrity and procedural fidelity (Hayden et al 2015, Schlosser 2002.…”

Section: Introduction Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment fidelity of technology‐enhanced reading therapy (CommuniCATE) for people with aphasia

Bacon

Marshall

Caute

et al. 2021

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Treatment fidelity (TF), that is, the degree to which the treatment delivery has adhered to protocol, is an important aspect of establishing treatment validity and reliability. Research has shown that establishing TF is only done in a small percentage of aphasia treatment studies.Aims: This project supports the work of the CommuniCATE study, which explored the benefits of technology-enhanced aphasia therapy on participants' reading, writing, speech and conversation skills. It examines the TF of the Reading strand of the CommuniCATE project by assessing whether the therapy adhered to the protocol. The following research questions were asked: Does treatment delivery adhere to treatment protocol? Does the degree of TF vary according to the person delivering the therapy (i.e. student therapist or qualified therapist)? Does the degree of TF vary over time (early treatment sessions compared with later treatment sessions)? Was the checklist tool reliable?Methods & Procedures: This study assessed the fidelity of 38 retrospective video recordings of therapy. It used a checklist measure of criteria to which the delivery of the sessions should adhere, and against which the sessions were rated.Participants were the people with aphasia receiving therapy, the students and qualified speech and language therapists delivering therapy, and the independent raters assessing the sessions. A sample of sessions was randomly chosen, including sessions delivered by qualified therapists and by students, and sessions from different time points in the treatment process. The fidelity was rated by the first author, and the fidelity rating calculated as a percentage. Comparisons in fidelity scores for the different variables were drawn using Mann-Whitney tests.The reliability of the checklist was assessed through inter and intra-rater reliability testing, and the results were analysed using Kappa statistics.Outcomes & Results: High fidelity was found across all therapy conditions with a mean score of 98.2%. Fidelity scores were not affected by the administrator of therapy; sessions delivered by qualified and student therapists were rated equally highly. There was a small but significant effect of time, with later treatmentThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Treatment integrity of elaborated semantic feature analysis aphasia therapy delivered in individual and group settings

Cited by 8 publications

References 64 publications

A Systematic Review of Semantic Feature Analysis Therapy Studies for Aphasia

A Systematic Review of Semantic Feature Analysis Therapy Studies for Aphasia

SUpporting wellbeing through PEeR-Befriending (SUPERB) feasibility trial: fidelity of peer-befriending for people with aphasia

Treatment fidelity of technology‐enhanced reading therapy (CommuniCATE) for people with aphasia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About