Speech language therapists' experiences with subjective well-being in people with aphasia.

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. What this paper adds What is already known on this subject Recent studies suggest that quality of life measures may lack facets related to subjective well-being (SWB). Aphasia is likely to impact on SWB of a stroke survivor, but it is unclear if and how SWB is addressed by speech and language therapists in diagnosis, and treatment of Dutch PWA. What this study adds This study provides insight into the operationalization of SWB in Dutch clinical practice, including barriers SLTs experience when addressing SWB. Clinical implications of this study Monitoring and influencing SWB of people with aphasia is a complex process, that SLTs consider only possible in multi-disciplinary teams. Clear guidelines on roles and responsibilities between various disciplines involved are necessary to improve care for people with aphasia.

Evaluating communication partner training in healthcare centres: Understanding the mechanisms of behaviour change.

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 motivations. Remaining findings show HCPs' perspectives on various barriers to use supportive conversation techniques and tools. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: HCPs in this study identified elements in our CPT intervention that positively influenced their behaviour change. Of these, role-play and coaching on the job were particularly important. HCPs suggested this last element should be better implemented. Therefore, healthcare settings wishing to enhance HCPs' communication skills should first consider enhancing HCPs' opportunities for experiential learning. Second, healthcare settings should determine which HCPs are suitable to have a role as implementation support practitioners, to support their colleagues in the use of supportive conversation techniques and tools. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject? Several communication partner training (CPT) interventions for healthcare professionals (HCPs) have been developed and used to support HCPs to interact successfully with people with aphasia. To date, there is limited evidence of the mechanisms of change that explain exactly what changes in HCPs' behaviour after CPT and why these changes take place. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Evaluating our CPT intervention by identifying mechanisms of change from the perspectives of HCPs provided us with: (i) a better understanding of the elements that should be included in CPT interventions in different contexts; and (ii) an understanding of the important remaining barriers identified by HCPs to use supportive conversation techniques, even after CPT is implemented. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This study shows the different intervention elements in our CPT intervention that improve HCPs' capabilities, motivations or opportunities to use supportive conversation techniques and tools. Essential ingredients of CPT according to HCPs in this study were role-play and coaching on the job by an expert and were linked to an increase in HCPs' motivations or beliefs about self-competency. Healthcare settings wishing to enhance HCPs' communication skills should therefore consider appointing implementation support practitioners to coach and support HCPs, and facilitate these practitioners to fulfil this role.

How do healthcare professionals experience communication with people with aphasia and what content should communication partner training entail?

PURPOSE: Aphasia after stroke has been shown to lead to communication difficulties between healthcare professionals (HCP) and people with aphasia. Clinical guidelines emphasize the importance of teaching HCP to use supportive conversative techniques through communication partner training (CPT). The aim of this study is to explore and describe the experiences of HCP in communicating with people with aphasia and their needs and wishes for the content in CPT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data were collected through qualitative semi-structured interviews with 17 HCP. HCP were recruited from two geriatric rehabilitation centres in the Netherlands and one academic hospital in Belgium. The interviews drew upon the qualitative research methodologies ethnography and phenomenology and were thematically analysed using the six steps of Braun & Clarke. RESULTS: Three themes were derived from the interviews. HCP experienced that communication difficulties impede healthcare activities (theme 1) and reported the need to improve communication through organizational changes (theme 2), changing the roles of SLTs (theme 3) and increasing knowledge and skills of HCP (theme 4). CONCLUSIONS: According to HCP, communication difficulties challenge the provision of healthcare activities and lead to negative feelings in HCP. HCP suggest that communication can be improved by providing more time in the healthcare pathway of people with aphasia, adapting healthcare information to the needs of people with aphasia, commitment of physicians and managers, changing the roles of SLTs and improving knowledge and skills of HCP.Implications for rehabilitationCommunication between healthcare professionals (HCP) and people with aphasia can be improved by training HCP to use supportive conversation techniques and tools.An important condition for successful implementation of communication partner trainings in healthcare centres is to identify the experiences of HCP with communication with people with aphasia and their needs and wishes for training content.This study shows that communication problems between HCP and people with aphasia impede diagnosis and therapy with considerable implications for healthcare quality.The suggestions that HCP have concerning the content of communication partner trainings can be placed under "education" and "implementation and post-training support." HCP describe specific roles for speech-and language therapists to fulfil after the training and suggest two main changes that should be made at an organizational level.