Diagnostic Assessment in Primary Progressive Aphasia: An Illustrative Case Example.

Purpose Diagnosis and classification of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) requires confirmation of specific speech and language symptoms, highlighting the important role of speech-language pathologists in the evaluation process. The purpose of this case report is to inform speech-language pathologists regarding current practices for diagnostic assessment in PPA, describing standard approaches as well as complementary, state-of-the-art procedures that may improve diagnostic precision. Method We describe the diagnostic evaluation of a 49-year-old woman with complaints of progressive word-finding difficulty. She completed standard neurological, neuropsychological, and speech-language evaluations, as well as magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography imaging of her brain. In addition, a history of developmental speech, language, and learning abilities was obtained, as well as genetic testing and assessment of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers. We discuss the evaluation results in the context of the most current research related to PPA diagnosis. Conclusion Detailed behavioral assessment, thorough intake of symptom history and neurodevelopmental differences, multimodal neuroimaging, and comprehensive examination of genes and biomarkers are of paramount importance for detecting and characterizing PPA, with ramifications for early behavioral and/or pharmacological intervention. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12771113.

A randomized clinical trial of trans-dermal nicotine replacement in pregnant African-American smokers.

We compared acceptability, adherence and efficacy of trans-dermal nicotine patches and cognitive behavioral therapy (Group 1) to cognitive behavioral therapy alone (Group 2) in minority pregnant smokers. This is a randomized controlled trial. 52 women were recruited during pregnancy with a mean gestational age 18.5 ± 5.0 weeks and followed through delivery. Randomization was by site and initial cotinine levels. Interventionists and interviewers were blinded to group assignment. Two different nicotine replacement therapy dosing regiments were administered according to the baseline salivary cotinine level. A process evaluation model summarized patient adherence. The main outcome measure was self-report of cessation since last visit, confirmed by exhaled carbon monoxide. Analyses of categorical and continuous measures were conducted as well as linear trend tests of salivary cotinine levels. Women lost to follow-up were considered treatment failures. Participants were on average 27.5 ± 5.4 years old, 81 % were single, 69 % unemployed and 96 % were Medicaid eligible. A process evaluation indicated patients in both groups were adherent to scheduled program procedures through Visit 4, but not for Visits 5 and 6. Confirmed quit rates were: at visit 3, 23 (Group 1) and 0 % (Group 2) (p = 0.02); at visits 4 and 5, no difference; at visit 6, 19 (Group 1) and 0 % (Group 2) (p = 0.05). Group 1 delivered infants with a mean gestational age of 39.4 weeks versus 38.4 weeks in Group 2 (p = 0.02). 73 % (52/71) of the eligible smokers agreed to participate and 65 % (17/26) of Group 1 completed the protocol (i.e. attended 6 visits). A comparison of Group 1 and 2 quit rates confirmed a non-significant difference.