Self-managed, computerised word finding therapy as an add-on to usual care for chronic aphasia post-stroke: An economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost-effectiveness of self-managed computerised word finding therapy as an add-on to usual care for people with aphasia post-stroke. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness modelling over a life-time period, taking a UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social service perspective. SETTING: Based on the Big CACTUS randomised controlled trial, conducted in 21 UK NHS speech and language therapy departments. PARTICIPANTS: Big CACTUS included 278 people with long-standing aphasia post-stroke. INTERVENTIONS: Computerised word finding therapy plus usual care; usual care alone; usual care plus attention control. MAIN MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated, comparing the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained for each intervention. Credible intervals (CrI) for costs and QALYs, and probabilities of cost-effectiveness, were obtained using probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Subgroup and scenario analyses investigated cost-effectiveness in different subsets of the population, and the sensitivity of results to key model inputs. RESULTS: Adding computerised word finding therapy to usual care had an ICER of £42,686 per QALY gained compared with usual care alone (incremental QALY gain: 0.02 per patient (95% CrI: -0.05 to 0.10); incremental costs: £732.73 per patient (95% CrI: £674.23 to £798.05)). ICERs for subgroups with mild or moderate word finding difficulties were £22,371 and £21,262 per QALY gained respectively. CONCLUSION: Computerised word finding therapy represents a low cost add-on to usual care, but QALY gains and estimates of cost-effectiveness are uncertain. Computerised therapy is more likely to be cost-effective for people with mild or moderate, as opposed to severe, word finding difficulties.

Towards a theoretical framework for Integrated Team Leadership (IgTL).

This study presents a framework for the leadership of integrated, interprofessional health, and social-care teams (IgTs) based on a previous literature review and a qualitative study. The theoretical framework for Integrated Team Leadership (IgTL) is based on contributions from 15 professional and nonprofessional staff, in 8 community teams in the United Kingdom. Participants shared their perceptions of IgT's good practice in relation to patient outcomes. There were two clear elements, Person-focused and Task-focused leadership behaviors with particular emphasis on the facilitation of shared professional practices. Person-focused leadership skills include: inspiring and motivating; walking the talk; change and innovation; consideration; empowerment, teambuilding and team maintenance; and emotional intelligence. Task-focused leadership behaviors included: setting team direction; managing performance; and managing external relationships. Team members felt that the IgTL should be: a Health or Social Care (HSC) professional; engaged in professional practice; and have worked in an IgT before leading one. Technical and cultural issues were identified that differentiate IgTL from usual leadership practice; in particular the ability to facilitate or create barriers to effective integrated teamworking within the organizational context. In common with other OECD countries, there are policy imperatives in England for further integration of health and social care, needed to improve the quality and effectiveness of care for older people with multiple conditions. Further attention is needed to support the development of effective IgTs and leadership will be a pre-requisite to achieve this vision. The research advances the understanding of the need for skilled interprofessional leadership practice.

Attention control comparisons with SLT for people with aphasia following stroke: methodological concerns raised following a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Attention control comparisons in trials of stroke rehabilitation require care to minimize the risk of comparison choice bias. We compared the similarities and differences in SLT and social support control interventions for people with aphasia. DATA SOURCES: Trial data from the 2016 Cochrane systematic review of SLT for aphasia after stroke Methods: Direct and indirect comparisons between SLT, social support and no therapy controls. We double-data extracted intervention details using the template for intervention description and replication. Standardized mean differences and risk ratios (95% confidence intervals (CIs)) were calculated. RESULTS: Seven trials compared SLT with social support ( n = 447). Interventions were matched in format, frequency, intensity, duration and dose. Procedures and materials were often shared across interventions. Social support providers received specialist training and support. Targeted language rehabilitation was only described in therapy interventions. Higher drop-out ( P = 0.005, odds ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.81) and non-adherence to social support interventions ( P < 0.00001, OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09-0.37) indicated an imbalance in completion rates increasing the risk of control comparison bias. CONCLUSION: Distinctions between social support and therapy interventions were eroded. Theoretically based language rehabilitation was the remaining difference in therapy interventions. Social support is an important adjunct to formal language rehabilitation. Therapists should continue to enable those close to the person with aphasia to provide tailored communication support, functional language stimulation and opportunities to apply rehabilitation gains. Systematic group differences in completion rates is a design-related risk of bias in outcomes observed.

Combined electrical stimulation and exercise for swallow rehabilitation post-stroke: a pilot randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is common after stroke, affecting up to 50% of patients initially. It can lead to post-stroke pneumonia, which causes 30% of stroke-related deaths, a longer hospital stay and poorer health outcomes. Dysphagia care post-stroke generally focuses on the management of symptoms, via modified oral intake textures and adapted posture, rather than direct physical rehabilitation of the swallowing function. Transcutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is a promising rehabilitation technology that can be used to stimulate swallowing; however, findings regarding efficacy have been conflicting. AIMS: This pilot randomized controlled study involving three UK sites compared the efficacy of the Ampcare Effective Swallowing Protocol (ESP), combining NMES with swallow-strengthening exercises, with usual care in order to clarify evidence on NMES in the treatment of dysphagia post-stroke. A further objective was to pilot recruitment procedures and outcome measures in order to inform the design of a full-scale trial. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Thirty patients were recruited and randomized into either (1) usual speech and language therapy dysphagia care; or (2) Ampcare ESP, receiving treatment 5 days/week for 4 weeks. Outcome measures included: the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS), the Rosenbek Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) and patient-reported outcomes (Swallow Related Quality of Life-SWAL-QOL). OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Thirty patients were recruited; 15 were randomized to the Ampcare ESP intervention arm and 15 to usual care. A greater proportion (75%, or 9/12) of patients receiving Ampcare ESP improved compared with 57% (or 8/14) of the usual-care group. Patients receiving Ampcare ESP also made clinically meaningful change (a comparative benefit of 1.5 on the FOIS, and on the PAS: 1.35 for diet and 0.3 for fluids) compared with usual care. The intervention group also reported much better outcome satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The pilot demonstrated successful recruitment, treatment safety and tolerability and clinically meaningful outcome improvements, justifying progression to a fully powered study. It also showed clinically meaningful treatment trends for the Ampcare ESP intervention.

The association between delays in screening for and assessing dysphagia after acute stroke, and the risk of stroke-associated pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: There is no robust evidence that screening patients with acute stroke for dysphagia reduces the risk of stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP), or of how quickly it should be done after admission. We aimed to identify if delays in bedside dysphagia screening and comprehensive dysphagia assessments by a speech and language therapist (SALT) were associated with patients' risk of SAP. METHODS: Nationwide, registry-based, prospective cohort study of patients admitted with acute stroke in England and Wales. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression models were fitted, adjusting for patient variables and stroke severity. The exposures were time from (1) admission to bedside dysphagia screen, and (2) admission to comprehensive dysphagia assessment. RESULTS: Of 63 650 patients admitted with acute stroke, 55 838 (88%) had a dysphagia screen, and 24 542 (39%) a comprehensive dysphagia assessment. Patients with the longest delays in dysphagia screening (4th quartile adjusted OR 1.14, 1.03 to 1.24) and SALT dysphagia assessment (4th quartile adjusted OR 2.01, 1.76 to 2.30) had a higher risk of SAP. The risk of SAP increased in a dose-response manner with delays in SALT dysphagia assessment, with an absolute increase of pneumonia incidence of 1% per day of delay. CONCLUSIONS: Delays in screening for and assessing dysphagia after stroke, are associated with higher risk of SAP. Since SAP is one of the main causes of mortality after acute stroke, early dysphagia assessment may contribute to preventing deaths from acute stroke and could be implemented even in settings without access to high-technology specialist stroke care.

Provision of powered communication aids in the United Kingdom.

AAC service provision in the United Kingdom (UK) has evolved since the first service dedicated to the provision of communication aids opened in 1986. Within the UK, many health and care services are provided via government funding; however, the assessment and provision of AAC and specifically of speech-generating devices (SGDs) is inconsistent and inequitable. The study reported in this paper aimed to collect information on levels of current provision of powered communication aids (the term used in the study to refer to SGDs) by UK service providers in 2013 with the intention of improving future estimates for need of services. A questionnaire survey was designed and data were obtained from 98 AAC services across the UK. Service providers reported the number of individuals known to be using powered communication aids and the mean value reported was 0.0155% of the services' catchment populations. However levels of service provision reported were highly variable. Although the data reported must be treated with caution, it adds to the sparse literature on the topic, informs AAC service design and delivery in the UK, and acts as an indicative baseline measure for future service development.

Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke.

BACKGROUND: Aphasia is an acquired language impairment following brain damage that affects some or all language modalities: expression and understanding of speech, reading, and writing. Approximately one third of people who have a stroke experience aphasia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of speech and language therapy (SLT) for aphasia following stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 9 September 2015), CENTRAL (2015, Issue 5) and other Cochrane Library Databases (CDSR, DARE, HTA, to 22 September 2015), MEDLINE (1946 to September 2015), EMBASE (1980 to September 2015), CINAHL (1982 to September 2015), AMED (1985 to September 2015), LLBA (1973 to September 2015), and SpeechBITE (2008 to September 2015). We also searched major trials registers for ongoing trials including ClinicalTrials.gov (to 21 September 2015), the Stroke Trials Registry (to 21 September 2015), Current Controlled Trials (to 22 September 2015), and WHO ICTRP (to 22 September 2015). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials we also handsearched the International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders (1969 to 2005) and reference lists of relevant articles, and we contacted academic institutions and other researchers. There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SLT (a formal intervention that aims to improve language and communication abilities, activity and participation) versus no SLT; social support or stimulation (an intervention that provides social support and communication stimulation but does not include targeted therapeutic interventions); or another SLT intervention (differing in duration, intensity, frequency, intervention methodology or theoretical approach). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of included trials. We sought missing data from investigators. MAIN RESULTS: We included 57 RCTs (74 randomised comparisons) involving 3002 participants in this review (some appearing in more than one comparison). Twenty-seven randomised comparisons (1620 participants) assessed SLT versus no SLT; SLT resulted in clinically and statistically significant benefits to patients' functional communication (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.49, P = 0.01), reading, writing, and expressive language, but (based on smaller numbers) benefits were not evident at follow-up. Nine randomised comparisons (447 participants) assessed SLT with social support and stimulation; meta-analyses found no evidence of a difference in functional communication, but more participants withdrew from social support interventions than SLT. Thirty-eight randomised comparisons (1242 participants) assessed two approaches to SLT. Functional communication was significantly better in people with aphasia that received therapy at a high intensity, high dose, or over a long duration compared to those that received therapy at a lower intensity, lower dose, or over a shorter period of time. The benefits of a high intensity or a high dose of SLT were confounded by a significantly higher dropout rate in these intervention groups. Generally, trials randomised small numbers of participants across a range of characteristics (age, time since stroke, and severity profiles), interventions, and outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides evidence of the effectiveness of SLT for people with aphasia following stroke in terms of improved functional communication, reading, writing, and expressive language compared with no therapy. There is some indication that therapy at high intensity, high dose or over a longer period may be beneficial. HIgh-intensity and high dose interventions may not be acceptable to all.

The state of the art in non-pharmacological interventions for developmental stuttering. Part 2: qualitative evidence synthesis of views and experiences.

BACKGROUND: A range of interventions have been developed to treat stuttering in recent years. The effectiveness of these interventions has largely been assessed in studies focusing on the impact of specific types of therapy on patient outcomes. Relatively little is known about the factors that influence how the delivery and impact of different types of intervention may be experienced from the perspective of both people who deliver as well as those who receive interventions. AIMS: To synthesize the available evidence in relation to factors that might enhance or mitigate against successful outcomes following interventions for stuttering by identifying and synthesizing relevant qualitative research that explored the experiences of people delivering and receiving interventions that aim to improve fluency. METHODS & PROCEDURES: We carried out a systematic review including research that had used in-depth interviews and focus groups and conducted a substantive qualitative analysis of the data collected. Included study populations were either adults or children affected by a diagnosed stutter and/or providers of therapy for stuttering. An iterative approach was used to search for published qualitative evidence in relevant databases from 1990 to 2014. Retrieved citations were sifted for relevance and the data from articles that met the inclusion criteria were extracted. Each included paper was assessed for quality and a thematic analysis and synthesis of findings was carried out. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: Synthesized qualitative evidence highlights the changing experiences for people who stutter both historically and, for individuals, over the life course. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of interventions for stuttering are encountered at the individual, intervention, interpersonal and social levels. Interventions may be particularly pertinent at certain transition points in the life course. Attention to emotional as well as practical aspects of stuttering is valued by people receiving therapy. The client-therapist relationship and support from others are also key factors in achieving successful outcomes. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: A synthesis of qualitative findings from published papers has added to the effectiveness data reported in an accompanying paper in understanding how stuttering impacts on people across the life course. Evidence suggests that a client-centred and individually tailored approach enhances the likelihood of successful intervention outcomes through attention to emotional, situational and practical needs.

The state of the art in non-pharmacological interventions for developmental stuttering. Part 1: a systematic review of effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: The growing range of available treatment options for people who stutter presents a challenge for clinicians, service managers and commissioners, who need to have access to the best available treatment evidence to guide them in providing the most appropriate interventions. While a number of reviews of interventions for specific populations or a specific type of intervention have been carried out, a broad-based systematic review across all forms of intervention for adults and children was needed to provide evidence to underpin future guidelines, inform the implementation of effective treatments and identify future research priorities. AIMS: To identify and synthesize the published research evidence on the clinical effectiveness of the broad range of non-pharmacological interventions for the management of developmental stuttering. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A systematic review of the literature reporting interventions for developmental stuttering was carried out between August 2013 and April 2014. Searches were not limited by language or location, but were restricted by date to studies published from 1990 onwards. Methods for the identification of relevant studies included electronic database searching, reference list checking, citation searching and hand searching of key journals. Appraisal of study quality was performed using a tool based on established criteria for considering risk of bias. Due to heterogeneity in intervention content and outcomes, a narrative synthesis was completed. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: The review included all available types of intervention and found that most may be of benefit to at least some people who stutter. There was evidence, however, of considerable individual variation in response to these interventions. The review indicated that effects could be maintained following all types of interventions (although this was weakest with regard to feedback and technology interventions). CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights a need for greater consensus with regard to the key outcomes used to evaluate stuttering interventions, and also a need for enhanced understanding of the process whereby interventions effect change. Further analysis of the variation in effectiveness for different individuals or groups is needed in order to identify who may benefit most from which intervention.

Adapting the stroke therapy outcome measure for use by Multidisciplinary Teams: considering reliability.

PURPOSE: The Therapy Outcome Measure (TOM) comprises many profession and client group-specific adapted scales based on the International Classification of Functioning Model, used by different Health Care Professionals (HCPs). A new Multidisciplinary stroke TOM scale (MDT Stroke TOMs) was developed by amalgamating the relevant scales. This study aimed to develop a scale to describe patients' abilities and improve communication and collaboration within the stroke Multidisciplinary Team (MDT). The present study investigated the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of this adaptation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MDT Stroke TOM Scale was developed by combining and rewording four profession-specific adapted TOM scales following iterative trials and discussions leading to an agreed version. 150 stroke Allied Health Professional (AHPs) and nurses were trained virtually in TOM and the MDT Stroke TOM Scale. Ten AHP and nursing raters from five professions evaluated ten composite stroke case studies for inter-rater reliability. Six participated in the intra-rater reliability review of the same three case studies at different time points. Reliability was quantified using intraclass correlation coefficients and measurement error using the smallest detectable change. RESULTS: There was good to excellent concordance between the raters in terms of scoring. Raters' scores were also consistent. The MDT Stroke TOMs is being used consistently across the South West London Stroke Network. CONCLUSION: The Stroke MDT TOMs is psychometrically robust and should assist with improving team work in the rehabilitation of stroke patients and their carers. Future research may use MDT Stroke TOM to promote interprofessional team working and facilitate communication in Stroke Rehabilitation.

The introduction of a new Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) Stroke Therapy Outcome measure to encourage interdisciplinary working and collaboration.One measure to complete and document for busy MDTs, which has good - excellent reliability.Early and timely MDT discussions regarding patient care and needs.Using this reliable outcome measure facilitates audit and benchmarking of services.

Methods to advance health equity and social justice in healthcare: Protocol for a scoping review on the utilisation of routinely collected data.

BACKGROUND: Many areas of healthcare are impacted by a paucity of research that is translatable to clinical practice. Research utilising real-world data, such as routinely collected patient data, may be one option to efficiently create evidence to inform practice and service delivery. Such studies are also valuable for exploring (in)equity of services and outcomes, and benefit from using non-selected samples representing the diversity of the populations served in the 'real world'. This scoping review aims to identify and map the published research which utilises routinely collected clinical healthcare data. A secondary aim is to explore the extent to which this literature supports the pursuit of social justice in health, including health inequities and intersectional approaches. METHOD: This review utilises Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for scoping reviews and draws on the recommended enhancements of this framework to promote a team-based and mixed methods approach. This includes searching electronic databases and screening papers based on a pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data relevant to the research aims will be extracted from included papers, including the clinical/professional area of the topic, the source of data that was used, and whether it addresses elements of social justice. All screening and reviewing will be collaborative and iterative, drawing on strengths of the research team and responsive changes to challenges will be made. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively, and conceptual content analysis will be utilised to understand qualitative data. These will be collectively synthesised in alignment to the research aims. CONCLUSION: Our findings will highlight the extent to which such research is being conducted and published, including gaps and make recommendations for future endeavours for real-world data studies. The findings from this scoping review will be relevant for practitioners and researchers, as well as health service managers, commissioners, and research funders.

Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work.

BACKGROUND: Interdisciplinary team work is increasingly prevalent, supported by policies and practices that bring care closer to the patient and challenge traditional professional boundaries. To date, there has been a great deal of emphasis on the processes of team work, and in some cases, outcomes. METHOD: This study draws on two sources of knowledge to identify the attributes of a good interdisciplinary team; a published systematic review of the literature on interdisciplinary team work, and the perceptions of over 253 staff from 11 community rehabilitation and intermediate care teams in the UK. These data sources were merged using qualitative content analysis to arrive at a framework that identifies characteristics and proposes ten competencies that support effective interdisciplinary team work. RESULTS: Ten characteristics underpinning effective interdisciplinary team work were identified: positive leadership and management attributes; communication strategies and structures; personal rewards, training and development; appropriate resources and procedures; appropriate skill mix; supportive team climate; individual characteristics that support interdisciplinary team work; clarity of vision; quality and outcomes of care; and respecting and understanding roles. CONCLUSIONS: We propose competency statements that an effective interdisciplinary team functioning at a high level should demonstrate.

Using computers to enable self-management of aphasia therapy exercises for word finding: the patient and carer perspective.

BACKGROUND: Speech and language therapy (SLT) for aphasia can be difficult to access in the later stages of stroke recovery, despite evidence of continued improvement with sufficient therapeutic intensity. Computerized aphasia therapy has been reported to be useful for independent language practice, providing new opportunities for continued rehabilitation. The success of this option depends on its acceptability to patients and carers. AIMS: To investigate factors that affect the acceptability of independent home computerized aphasia therapy practice. METHODS & PROCEDURES: An acceptability study of computerized therapy was carried out alongside a pilot randomized controlled trial of computer aphasia therapy versus usual care for people more than 6 months post-stroke. Following language assessment and computer exercise prescription by a speech and language therapist, participants practised three times a week for 5 months at home with monthly volunteer support. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 participants who received the intervention and ten carers (n = 24). Questions from a topic guide were presented and answered using picture, gesture and written support. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Three research SLTs identified and cross-checked themes and subthemes emerging from the data. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The key themes that emerged were benefits and disadvantages of computerized aphasia therapy, need for help and support, and comparisons with face-to-face therapy. The independence, flexibility and repetition afforded by the computer was viewed as beneficial and the personalized exercises motivated participants to practise. Participants and carers perceived improvements in word-finding and confidence-talking. Computer practice could cause fatigue and interference with other commitments. Support from carers or volunteers for motivation and technical assistance was seen as important. Although some participants preferred face-to-face therapy, using a computer for independent language practice was perceived to be an acceptable alternative. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Independent computerized aphasia therapy is acceptable to stroke survivors. Acceptability can be maximized by tailoring exercises to personal interests of the individual, ensuring access to support and giving consideration to fatigue and life style when recommending practice schedules.

Computer therapy compared with usual care for people with long-standing aphasia poststroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial to study the effectiveness of self-managed computer treatment for people with long-standing aphasia after stroke. METHOD: In this pilot single-blinded, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial participants with aphasia were allocated to self-managed computer treatment with volunteer support or usual care (everyday language activity). The 5-month intervention period was followed by 3 months without intervention to investigate treatment maintenance. RESULTS: Thirty-four participants were recruited. Seventeen participants were allocated to each group. Thirteen participants from the usual care group and 15 from the computer treatment group were followed up at 5 months. An average of 4 hours 43 minutes speech and language therapy time and 4 hours volunteer support time enabled an average of 25 hours of independent practice. The difference in percentage change in naming ability from baseline at 5 months between groups was 19.8% (95% CI, 4.4-35.2; P=0.014) in favor of the treatment group. Participants with more severe aphasia showed little benefit. Results demonstrate early indications of cost-effectiveness of self-managed computer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial indicates that self-managed computer therapy for aphasia is feasible and that it will be practical to recruit sufficient participants to conduct an appropriately powered clinical trial to investigate the effectiveness of self-managed computer therapy for people with long-standing aphasia. Clinical Trial Registration- www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN91534629.

Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke.

BACKGROUND: Aphasia is an acquired language impairment following brain damage that affects some or all language modalities: expression and understanding of speech, reading and writing. Approximately one-third of people who have a stroke experience aphasia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of speech and language therapy (SLT) for aphasia following stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched June 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2011) and CINAHL (1982 to July 2011). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials we handsearched the International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders (1969 to 2005) and reference lists of relevant articles and contacted academic institutions and other researchers. There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SLT (a formal intervention that aims to improve language and communication abilities, activity and participation) with (1) no SLT; (2) social support or stimulation (an intervention that provides social support and communication stimulation but does not include targeted therapeutic interventions); and (3) another SLT intervention (which differed in duration, intensity, frequency, intervention methodology or theoretical approach). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of included trials. We sought missing data from investigators. MAIN RESULTS: We included 39 RCTs (51 randomised comparisons) involving 2518 participants in this review. Nineteen randomised comparisons (1414 participants) compared SLT with no SLT where SLT resulted in significant benefits to patients' functional communication (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.30, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.52, P = 0.008), receptive and expressive language. Seven randomised comparisons (432 participants) compared SLT with social support and stimulation but found no evidence of a difference in functional communication. Twenty-five randomised comparisons (910 participants) compared two approaches to SLT. There was no indication of a difference in functional communication. Generally, the trials randomised small numbers of participants across a range of characteristics (age, time since stroke and severity profiles), interventions and outcomes. Suitable statistical data were unavailable for several measures. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides some evidence of the effectiveness of SLT for people with aphasia following stroke in terms of improved functional communication, receptive and expressive language. However, some trials were poorly reported. The potential benefits of intensive SLT over conventional SLT were confounded by a significantly higher dropout from intensive SLT. More participants also withdrew from social support than SLT interventions. There was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion regarding the effectiveness of any one specific SLT approach over another.

Barriers and facilitators to the use of high-technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: There has been a rapid growth in recent years of available technologies for individuals with communication difficulties. Research in the area is currently underdeveloped with practitioners having a limited body of work on which to draw to guide the process of intervention. Concerns have been raised that this newly developed technology may have limited functional usage. AIMS: This review aims to investigate the potential barriers and facilitators to high-technology AAC provision and its ongoing use. The aim of the analysis is to explore factors underpinning use rather than effectiveness, thus it synthesized data from predominantly qualitative and survey studies reporting the views and perceptions of AAC users or staff providing the devices. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: The review highlights the range of factors that can impact on provision and use of high-technology AAC, which practitioners should consider and address as appropriate in the intervention process. These include: ease of use of the device; reliability; availability of technical support; voice/language of the device; decision-making process; time taken to generate a message; family perceptions and support; communication partner responses; service provision; and knowledge and skills of staff. The work outlines how qualitative synthesis review methods may be applied to the consideration of published material that is not reporting outcomes data, and how this may provide valuable information to inform future studies. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners should be aware of barriers and facilitators to successful use when making recommendations, and consider how barriers where present might be overcome. Aspects of service delivery such as ongoing technical support and staff training may require further consideration. The synthesis of evidence describing views of users and providers, and the implementation of high-technology AAC systems, can provide valuable data to inform intervention studies and functional outcome measures.

Interventions using high-technology communication devices: a state of the art review.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: In the last 20 years the range of high-technology augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) aids has rapidly expanded. This review aimed to provide a 'state of the art' synthesis, to provide evidence-based information for researchers, potential users and service providers. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from 2000 to 2010, together with reference lists of included papers and review papers. The review considered work of any design which reported an intervention using high-tech AAC with people who have communication difficulties (excluding those with solely hearing or visual loss) published in peer-reviewed journals. RESULTS: Sixty-five papers reporting interventions using high-tech AAC were identified. There was evidence that high-technology AAC may be beneficial across a range of diagnoses and ages. The evidence, however, is currently drawn from studies using designs considered to be at high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: The review suggests that the high level of individual variation in outcome requires a greater understanding of characteristics of clients who may or may not benefit from this technology. Also, the wide range of outcomes measured requires further work in the field to establish what a 'good outcome' from intervention may be.

Rehabilitation of older patients: day hospital compared with rehabilitation at home. Clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: to test the hypothesis that older people and their informal carers are not disadvantaged by home-based rehabilitation (HBR) relative to day hospital rehabilitation (DHR). DESIGN: pragmatic randomised controlled trial. SETTING: four geriatric day hospitals and four home rehabilitation teams in England. PARTICIPANTS: eighty-nine patients referred for multidisciplinary rehabilitation. The target sample size was 460. INTERVENTION: multidisciplinary rehabilitation either in the home or in the day hospital. MEASUREMENTS: the primary outcome measure was the Nottingham extended activities of daily living scale (NEADL). Secondary outcome measures included EQ-5D, hospital anxiety and depression scale, therapy outcome measures, hospital admissions and the General Health Questionnaire for carers. RESULTS: at the primary end point of 6 months NEADL scores were not significantly in favour of HBR cf. DHR; mean difference -2.139 (95% confidence interval -6.87 to 2.59, P = 0.37). A post hoc analysis suggested non-inferiority for HBR for NEADL but there was considerable statistical uncertainty. CONCLUSION: taken together the statistical analyses and lack of power of the trial outcomes do not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that patients in receipt of HBR are disadvantaged compared with those receiving DHR.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Speech and Language Therapy Profession and Their Patients.

Introduction: The UK's response to the COVID-19 pandemic presented multiple challenges to healthcare services including the suspension of non-urgent care. The impact on neurorehabilitation professions, including speech and language therapy (SLT), has been substantial. Objectives: To review the changes to SLT services triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic with respect to referral rates, service delivery and outcomes, as well as examining the contribution of SLTs to the neurorehabilitation of COVID-19 patients. Methods: Two surveys were distributed to Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) members exploring experiences of service provision at 6 weeks and 22 weeks after the pandemic was declared in the UK. Responses to closed-ended questions, including questions regarding referral numbers were analyzed descriptively and compared at the two time-points. A database comprising routine clinical data from SLT services across the UK was used to compare information on patients receiving services prior to and during the pandemic. Data on COVID-19 patients was extracted, and findings are provided descriptively. Results: Referrals to SLT services during the acute COVID-19 period in the UK were substantially less than in the same period in 2019. A number of service changes were common including adopting more flexible approaches to provision (such as tele-therapy) and being unable to provide services to some patients. Database analysis suggests fewer patients have accessed SLT since the pandemic began, including a reduction in neurorehabilitation patients. For those who received SLT, the outcomes did not change. SLTs supported a range of needs of COVID-19 patients. Treatment outcomes for COVID-19 patients with dysphagia were positive. Discussion: The pandemic has affected neurorehabilitation and SLT services broadly: referral patterns are different, usual care has been disrupted and interventions have been modified affecting the impact on patient outcomes both positively and negatively. Some patients with COVID-19 require and benefit from SLT intervention.

Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke.

BACKGROUND: Aphasia is an acquired language impairment following brain damage which affects some or all language modalities: expression and understanding of speech, reading and writing. Approximately one-third of people who have a stroke experience aphasia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of speech and language therapy (SLT) for aphasia following stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched April 2009), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2009) and CINAHL (1982 to April 2009). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials we handsearched the International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, searched reference lists of relevant articles and contacted other researchers and authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing SLT versus no SLT, SLT versus social support or stimulation, and one SLT intervention versus another SLT intervention. SLT refers to a formal speech and language therapy intervention that aims to improve language and communication abilities and in turn levels of communicative activity and participation. Social support and stimulation refers to an intervention which provides social support or communication stimulation but does not include targeted therapeutic interventions. Direct comparisons of different SLT interventions refers to SLT interventions that differ in terms of duration, intensity, frequency or method of intervention or in the theoretical basis for the SLT approach. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of included trials. We sought missing data from study investigators if necessary. MAIN RESULTS: We included 30 trials (41 paired comparisons) in the review: 14 subcomparisons (1064 participants) compared SLT with no SLT; six subcomparisons (279 participants) compared SLT with social support and stimulation; and 21 subcomparisons (732 participants) compared two approaches to SLT. In general, the trials randomised small numbers of participants across a range of characteristics (age, time since stroke and severity profiles), interventions and outcomes. Suitable statistical data were unavailable for several measures. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review shows some indication of the effectiveness of SLT for people with aphasia following stroke. We also observed a consistency in the direction of results which favoured intensive SLT over conventional SLT, though significantly more people withdrew from intensive SLT than conventional SLT. SLT facilitated by a therapist-trained and supervised volunteer appears to be as effective as the provision of SLT by a professional. There was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions in relation to the effectiveness of one SLT approach over another.