A survey of speech pathologists' opinions about the prospective acceptability of an online implementation platform for aphasia services.

BACKGROUND: Online knowledge translation (KT) approaches are becoming increasingly prevalent within healthcare due to their accessibility and facilitation of international support networks. Online platforms enable timely and far-reaching dissemination of current evidence and best-practice recommendations. Although there is potential to improve the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines, it is essential to consider the acceptability of online approaches to healthcare professionals to ensure their successful integration within everyday clinical settings. AIMS: To establish the prospective acceptability of a theoretically informed online intervention for speech pathologists, Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice, that aims to facilitate the implementation of aphasia best practice. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A mixed-methods multinational electronic survey based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) completed by aphasia researchers and clinicians. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: A total of 43 participants completed the survey with 91% (n = 39) indicating that they would use Aphasia Nexus. Understanding the intervention and how it works (intervention coherence as per the TFA) was the key factor influencing the likelihood of integration within everyday clinical practice. Participants identified potential areas where the intervention could influence service change and also recommended further design and content changes to improve the intervention. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable platform for further feasibility testing in the form of a pilot trial within an Australian-based health service. The study progresses the theory of TFA as it was a valuable framework facilitating the identification of prominent factors influencing acceptability. The study also informs further intervention refinements in preparation for the next stage of research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Online strategies have the potential to enhance KT and promote the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines. An online intervention, however, can only be effective if implemented well. For this reason, it is essential to establish the acceptability of online interventions to the intended recipients and therefore increase the likelihood of successful implementation. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study used a theoretically based framework to establish the acceptability of an online implementation intervention, Aphasia Nexus, to multinational aphasia clinicians and researchers. It demonstrated the value in identifying the prominent factors influencing acceptability to inform further intervention refinements and warrant continuing research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Speech pathologists should use online platforms to drive the implementation of best practice on an international scale. It is important for clinicians to have an in-depth understanding of online interventions and how they work to enhance their successful uptake into routine clinical practice. Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable online platform for implementing best practice in aphasia.

Measuring communication as a core outcome in aphasia trials: Results of the ROMA-2 international core outcome set development meeting.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based recommendations for a core outcome set (COS; minimum set of outcomes) for aphasia treatment research have been developed (the Research Outcome Measurement in Aphasia-ROMA, COS). Five recommended core outcome constructs: communication, language, quality of life, emotional well-being and patient-reported satisfaction/impact of treatment, were identified through three international consensus studies. Constructs were paired with outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) during an international consensus meeting (ROMA-1). Before the current study (ROMA-2), agreement had not been reached on OMIs for the constructs of communication or patient-reported satisfaction/impact of treatment. AIM: To establish consensus on a communication OMI for inclusion in the ROMA COS. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Research methods were based on recommendations from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative. Participants with expertise in design and conduct of aphasia trials, measurement instrument development/testing and/or communication outcome measurement were recruited through an open call. Before the consensus meeting, participants agreed on a definition of communication, identified appropriate OMIs, extracted their measurement properties and established criteria for their quality assessment. During the consensus meeting they short-listed OMIs and participants without conflicts of interest voted on the two most highly ranked instruments. Consensus was defined a priori as agreement by ≥ 70% of participants. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: In total, 40 researchers from nine countries participated in ROMA-2 (including four facilitators and three-panel members who participated in pre-meeting activities only). A total of 20 OMIs were identified and evaluated. Eight short-listed communication measures were further evaluated for their measurement properties and ranked. Participants in the consensus meeting (n = 33) who did not have conflicts of interest (n = 29) voted on the top two ranked OMIs: The Scenario Test (TST) and the Communication Activities of Daily Living-3 (CADL-3). TST received 72% (n = 21) of 'yes' votes and the CADL-3 received 28% (n = 8) of 'yes' votes. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Consensus was achieved that TST was the preferred communication OMI for inclusion in the ROMA COS. It is currently available in the original Dutch version and has been adapted into English, German and Greek. Further consideration must be given to the best way to measure communication in people with mild aphasia. Development of a patient-reported measure for satisfaction with/impact of treatment and multilingual versions of all OMIs of the COS is still required. Implementation of the ROMA COS would improve research outcome measurement and the quality, relevance, transparency, replicability and efficiency of aphasia treatment research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject International consensus has been reached on five core constructs to be routinely measured in aphasia treatment studies. International consensus has also been established for OMIs for the three constructs of language, quality of life and emotional well-being. Before this study, OMIs for the constructs of communication and patient-reported satisfaction/impact of treatment were not established. What this paper adds to existing knowledge We gained international consensus on an OMI for the construct of communication. TST is recommended for inclusion in the ROMA COS for routine use in aphasia treatment research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The ROMA COS recommends OMIs for a minimum set of outcomes for adults with post-stroke aphasia within phases I-IV aphasia treatment research. Although not intended for clinical use, clinicians may employ the instruments of the ROMA COS, considering the quality of their measurement properties. The systematic inclusion of a measure of communication, such as TST, in clinical practice could ultimately support the implementation of research evidence and best practices.

Prognostication in post-stroke aphasia: How do speech pathologists formulate and deliver information about recovery?

BACKGROUND: Prognostication is a complex clinical task that involves forming a prediction about recovery and communicating prognostic information to patients and families. In aphasia, recovery is difficult to predict and evidence-based guidance on prognosis delivery is lacking. Questions about aphasia prognosis commonly arise, but it is unknown how speech pathologists formulate and deliver information about expected recovery. An understanding of current practice in prognostication is needed to develop evidence-based guidelines for this process, and is necessary in order to ensure successful future implementation of recommended practice regarding prognosis delivery. AIMS: To identify the factors speech pathologists consider important when responding to questions about aphasia prognosis; to examine how they respond in different scenarios; and to evaluate their current attitudes towards aphasia prognostication. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A total of 54 speech pathologists participated in an online survey featuring hypothetical aphasia prognosis delivery scenarios, short-response questions and ratings. Open responses were analysed thematically. Multiple-choice responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Speech pathologists regarded factors relating to the nature and severity of post-stroke deficits, an individual's level of motivation and the availability of social support as most important for forming an aphasia prognosis. When delivering prognostic information, considerations of the recipient's emotional well-being, hope and expectations, and comprehension of information were regarded as most important. Speech pathologists' prognosis responses varied in content and manner of communication. The content of the responses included predictions of recovery and information about various attributes and activities contributing to recovery. Prognostic information was most frequently communicated through qualitative probability expressions, general statements and uncertainty-based expressions. A need for more professional support in aphasia prognostication was indicated. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: There is variation in the way speech pathologists respond to questions about aphasia prognosis, and it is unknown how these conversations affect people with aphasia and their significant others. Further research to understand speech pathologists' clinical reasoning and professional support needs, and the perspectives of people living with aphasia, may help to develop an evidence-based approach to prognostication in aphasia. What this paper adds What is already known on this subject Questions about aphasia prognosis are difficult to answer. Current methods for predicting aphasia recovery are yet to demonstrate the reliability and individual specificity required for clinical application. At present, there is no evidence-based guidance or support for prognosis delivery in aphasia. What this study adds to existing knowledge There is variation in the way speech pathologists predict aphasia recovery, the prognostic information they deliver and the manner in which they communicate prognoses. Current approaches to aphasia prognostication are reliant on experience and professional judgement, and speech pathologists desire more support for undertaking this task. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Speech pathologists lack a consistent approach to aphasia prognostication and desire more support in this task. The present findings offer insight into clinician attitudes and practice, and provide a direction for future research to establish best-practice guidelines for this complex and demanding area of aphasia management.

A content analysis of documentation on communication disability in hospital progress notes: diagnosis, function, and patient safety.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the content, quantity, and quality of multidisciplinary team documentation of 'communication' in hospital progress notes of patients with communication disability, and to explore the relationship of this documentation to patient safety. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review involving a descriptive analysis and a qualitative content analysis of the progress notes. SETTING: Acute medical and rehabilitation wards in two regional hospitals in one health district in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Eight patients with communication disability who had experienced documented patient safety incidents in hospital. METHODS: In total, 906 progress note entries about communication during 38 hospital admissions were extracted from eight patient's charts; written by staff in 11 different health disciplines. Data were analysed descriptively according to quantity, and qualitatively according to the content. RESULTS: Four content categories of meaning in progress note entries relating to communication were (1) use of communication diagnostic and impairment terms; (2) notes on the patient's communicative function; (3) reports of the topic or content of the patient's communication attempts; and (4) references to third parties communicating for the patient. Communication-related information was often brief, unclear, and/or inaccurate. Descriptions of communicative function and recommended strategies for successful communication were often lacking. CONCLUSION: The suboptimal documentation of patient communication in progress notes may contribute to the higher risk of patient safety incidents for hospital patients with communication disability. Increased accuracy in documenting communication disability and function in progress notes might assist staff in communicating with these patients and improve the quality and safety of their care.

Individualised active communication education (I-ACE): another clinical option for adults with hearing impairment with a focus on problem solving and self-management.

Objective: This clinical note describes the Individualised - Active Communication Education (I-ACE) programme designed to improve problem solving and self-management in adults with hearing impairment. Design: The I-ACE was offered to adult clients seeking help for the first time and effects were measured for participants using self-report questionnaires: the Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (goal attainment), the Hearing Handicap Questionnaire (hearing disability), and the International Outcome Inventory - Alternative Interventions (outcomes) immediately after programme completion and 3 months later. Participants also provided qualitative feedback about I-ACE. Study sample: Twenty-three participants completed I-ACE, with 22 completing all self-report questionnaires and 23 participants providing qualitative feedback. Results: The participants reported positive outcomes and goal attainment, but no change in hearing disability post-programme. The effects were maintained 3 months later. Qualitative feedback indicated that I-ACE supported participants in recognising and increasing awareness of their hearing difficulties and in developing potential solutions to these difficulties. Participants also enjoyed the opportunity to involve communication partners. Conclusion: I-ACE is an appropriate option for adults with hearing impairment who wish to become more aware of their hearing difficulties and how to solve them.

Priorities for Closing the Evidence-Practice Gaps in Poststroke Aphasia Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify implementation priorities for poststroke aphasia management relevant to the Australian health care context. DATA SOURCES: Using systematized searches of databases (CINAHL and MEDLINE), guideline and stroke websites, and other sources, evidence was identified and extracted for 7 implementation criteria for 13 topic areas relevant to aphasia management. These 7 priority-setting criteria were identified in the implementation literature: strength of the evidence, current evidence-practice gap, clinician preference, patient preference, modifiability, measurability, and health effect. STUDY SELECTION: Articles were included if they were in English, related to a specific recommendation requiring implementation, and contained information pertaining to any of the 7 prioritization criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: The scoping review methodology was chosen to address the broad nature of the topic. Evidence was extracted and placed in an evidence matrix. After this, evidence was summarized and then aphasia rehabilitation topics were prioritized using an approach developed by the research team. DATA SYNTHESIS: Evidence from 100 documents was extracted and summarized. Four topic areas were identified as implementation priorities for aphasia: timing, amount, and intensity of therapy; goal setting; information, education, and aphasia-friendly information; and constraint-induced language therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Closing the evidence-practice gaps in the 4 priority areas identified may deliver the greatest gains in outcomes for Australian stroke survivors with aphasia. Our approach to developing implementation priorities may be useful for identifying priorities for implementation in other health care areas.

What really matters to people with aphasia when it comes to group work? A qualitative investigation of factors impacting participation and integration.

BACKGROUND: Participation in a group environment is an inherently complex undertaking for people with aphasia. It involves engaging in multi-person interactions with other people who may have a range of communication strengths and strategies at their disposal. The potential challenges of community aphasia-group participation and practice has had limited attention in the research literature. Evidence from group users have primarily been drawn from the perspective of long-term members or those participating in highly specific and time-bound groups. There is a need to explore the experiences of a broader sample, including people who have left groups, to improve our understanding of structures, processes as well as leadership behaviours that may facilitate positive group participation experiences. AIM: To examine the potential factors operating within the group environment that contribute to positive and negative participation experiences. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Twenty-two people with aphasia participated in semi-structured interviews about their experiences of community aphasia groups. People who maintained long-term membership as well as those who had left groups were sampled. An interpretative phenomenological framework was employed to examine the data collected. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Seven factors emerged as central to participation experiences and contributed to the ability of people with aphasia to integrate and engage in the group space. These factors included: (1) balanced interactional patterns; (2) an open and non-hierarchical group environment; (3) communication awareness and education amongst members; (4) meaningful activity; (5) ritual and structure; (6) composition and group size; and (7) group leadership. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: People with aphasia perceive community aphasia-group participation to be beneficial to their ability to live well with aphasia. However, a range of challenges to successful participation are also evident. Inputs such as peer-to-peer communication strategies, shared roles and responsibilities, and consultation with regard to group objectives and processes provide group members with the opportunity to become active contributors, demonstrate competence and have influence over the group. When inputs are poorly implemented or absent, people with aphasia are at risk of feeling disabled and marginalized by the group experience.

The Acute Aphasia IMplementation Study (AAIMS): a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective implementation strategies to improve speech and language therapists' (SLTs) aphasia management practices are needed. Australian SLTs working in the acute setting have reported inconsistent implementation of post-stroke aphasia guideline recommendations. Therefore, implementation efforts to address these gaps are necessary. However, little is known about the effectiveness of behaviour-change strategies in SLTs providing acute aphasia management. AIMS: This study designed and tested the feasibility, acceptability and potential effectiveness of a tailored implementation strategy to improve acute SLTs' uptake of evidence in two areas of practice: aphasia-friendly information provision; and collaborative goal setting. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial design was used (retrospective trial registration number ACTRN12618000170224). Four acute SLT teams were randomly assigned to receive either Intervention A (targeted at improving information provision) or Intervention B (targeted at improving collaborative goal setting), and were blinded to their allocation. Interventions were tailored to address known barriers and included a face-to-face workshop incorporating behaviour-change techniques. Outcomes addressed the research questions of feasibility (e.g., treatment fidelity and retention of participants), acceptability (e.g., post-study focus groups) and potential effectiveness (e.g., medical record audits and behaviour construct surveys). The quantitative data were recorded at baseline and 3-6-month follow-up, allowing for change scores to be calculated. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: All four clusters completed the study, with 37 SLTs participating. The majority of participants were female (36/37 = 97.3%), entry-level clinicians (15/37 = 40.5%), with a mean age of 30 years. Medical record data from 107 patients were included (post-intervention n = 61; information provision intervention n = 36, goal-setting intervention n = 25). Overall, there was a significant improvement in the target behaviour for Intervention A (mean improvement 52.78%, p = 0.001), but a small non-significant change in the target behaviour for Intervention B (8.46%, p = 0.406). There were potentially significant changes seen in several, but not all, of the domains targeted by the interventions (e.g., Knowledge (p = 0.014), Beliefs about Capabilities (p = 0.032), and Environmental Context and Resources (p = 0.000) for Intervention A). CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This study showed that a tailored implementation intervention targeting acute SLTs' aphasia management practices was feasible to deliver and acceptable for most participants. In addition, the interventions were potentially effective, particularly for the information provision behaviour targeted by Intervention A. It was possible partially to explain the mechanisms of behaviour change that occurred during the study.

Engaging people experiencing communication disability in stroke rehabilitation: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Engagement is commonly considered important in stroke rehabilitation, with some arguing it is essential for positive patient outcomes. An emerging body of research indicates the practitioner influences engagement through their ways of relating, communicating and working with the patient. People experiencing communication disability may face particular challenges with engagement as a practitioner's communication and interactional patterns may limit their ability to engage. AIMS: To understand how rehabilitation practitioners worked to engage people experiencing communication disability throughout the course of rehabilitation. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A qualitative study using the Voice Centred Relational Approach. Longitudinal observational and interview data were gathered from 28 practitioners and three people experiencing communication disability in inpatient and community stroke rehabilitation services. Data were analyzed using the Listening Guide. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Engagement was a relational practice on the part of the rehabilitation practitioner. It was underpinned by a relational philosophy and characterized by three core processes: embedding relational work throughout rehabilitation; getting to know the patient and working in ways valued by the patient; and communicating using relational dialogue and supported conversation. Practitioners wove these together with their technical, disciplinary-based work and rehabilitation tasks. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Patient engagement was constructed through relationships and strongly influenced by the practitioners' way of thinking about and enacting practice, challenging the idea that engagement is solely an intrinsic patient state and behaviour. The findings raise questions about which aspects of rehabilitation work and communication are most valuable when working to engage people experiencing communication disability. Viewing engagement as a relational practice and understanding the different ways this is enacted may support practitioners to reflect on their understandings of engagement, their patient's engagement, their ways of working, and the frames and philosophies that surround and influence their practice.

Determinants of Living Well With Aphasia in the First Year Poststroke: A Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors that contribute to living well with aphasia in the first 12 months poststroke. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Hospitalized care, ambulatory care, and general community. PARTICIPANTS: A referred sample of people (N=58) with a first incidence of aphasia after stroke was assessed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postonset. Participants were recruited through speech-language pathologists in 2 capital cities in Australia. Presence of aphasia was determined through the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised by an experienced speech-language pathologist. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcomes were the 5 domains of the Assessment for Living with Aphasia at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months poststroke. The independent variables included demographics, physical functioning, social network, mood, aphasia severity, and a self-rating of successfully living with aphasia at the same time points. Mixed effects modeling was used to determine which factors contributed to the trajectory of each of the 5 domains of participation, impairment, environment, personal factors, and life with aphasia. RESULTS: Higher household income, larger social network size, being a woman, and having milder aphasia were positively associated with the participation domain. Graduate or postgraduate educational levels, low mood, and poor physical functioning were negatively associated with the participation domain. Factors positively associated with other domains included higher income, self-ratings of successfully living with aphasia, and aphasia severity. Low mood was consistently negatively associated with all of the domains. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial determinants were the most significant predictors of living well with aphasia in the first 12 months postonset. Aphasia rehabilitation needs to attend more to these factors to optimize outcomes.

Co-constructing engagement in stroke rehabilitation: a qualitative study exploring how practitioner engagement can influence patient engagement.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how practitioner engagement and disengagement occurred, and how these may influence patient care and engagement. DESIGN: A qualitative study using the Voice Centred Relational Methodology. Data included interviews, focus groups and observations. SETTING: Inpatient and community stroke rehabilitation services. SUBJECTS: Eleven people experiencing communication disability after stroke and 42 rehabilitation practitioners. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. RESULTS: The practitioner's engagement was important in patient engagement and service delivery. When patients considered practitioners were engaged, this helped engagement. When they considered practitioners were not engaged, their engagement was negatively affected. Practitioners considered their engagement was important but complex. It influenced how they worked and how they perceived the patient. Disengagement was taboo. It arose when not feeling confident, when not positively impacting outcomes, or when having an emotional response to a patient or interaction. Each party's engagement influenced the other, suggesting it was co-constructed. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioner engagement influenced patient engagement in stroke rehabilitation. Practitioner disengagement was reported by most practitioners but was often a source of shame.

'That doesn't translate': the role of evidence-based practice in disempowering speech pathologists in acute aphasia management.

BACKGROUND: An evidence-practice gap has been identified in current acute aphasia management practice, with the provision of services to people with aphasia in the acute hospital widely considered in the literature to be inconsistent with best-practice recommendations. The reasons for this evidence-practice gap are unclear; however, speech pathologists practising in this setting have articulated a sense of dissonance regarding their limited service provision to this population. A clearer understanding of why this evidence-practice gap exists is essential in order to support and promote evidence-based approaches to the care of people with aphasia in acute care settings. AIMS: To provide an understanding of speech pathologists' conceptualization of evidence-based practice for acute post-stroke aphasia, and its implementation. METHODS & PROCEDURES: This study adopted a phenomenological approach, underpinned by a social constructivist paradigm. In-depth interviews were conducted with 14 Australian speech pathologists, recruited using a purposive sampling technique. An inductive thematic analysis of the data was undertaken. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: A single, overarching theme emerged from the data. Speech pathologists demonstrated a sense of disempowerment as a result of their relationship with evidence-based practice for acute aphasia management. Three subthemes contributed to this theme. The first described a restricted conceptualization of evidence-based practice. The second revealed speech pathologists' strained relationships with the research literature. The third elucidated a sense of professional unease over their perceived inability to enact evidence-based clinical recommendations, despite their desire to do so. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Speech pathologists identified a current knowledge-practice gap in their management of aphasia in acute hospital settings. Speech pathologists place significant emphasis on the research evidence; however, their engagement with the research is limited, in part because it is perceived to lack clinical utility. A sense of professional dissonance arises from the conflict between a desire to provide best practice and the perceived barriers to implementing evidence-based recommendations clinically, resulting in evidence-based practice becoming a disempowering concept for some.

Neuroscientific Implications in Assessment and Intervention for Aphasia.

Within an overarching theme of generational change in aphasiology, the aims of this paper are to (a) unify the neuroscience of the language impairment of aphasia with the psychosocial science of aphasia, (b) consider the implications of technology and (c) address the global challenge of translational research in this field. To achieve the first two aims, 10 principles of neuroplasticity will be interpreted within the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Two novel treatment approaches to aphasia (UQ Aphasia LIFT and CommFit™) will be described that illustrate how the neuroplasticity principles can be interpreted more broadly within the ICF. The global challenge of translational research will bring the perspective of clinicians and consumers through to aphasia research via 3 recent sets of best practice statements for aphasia. Each demonstrates how the field of aphasiology is undertaking a knowledge synthesis within its broader remit of knowledge transfer and exchange. The Australian Aphasia Rehabilitation Pathway is described as a way of creating living clinical guidelines that are helpful to all stakeholders in aphasia research.

An International Perspective on Quality of Life in Aphasia: A Survey of Clinician Views and Practices from Sixteen Countries.

OBJECTIVE: To gain an insight into speech and language therapists' perspectives on and practices in quality of life in aphasia. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: The International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics Aphasia Committee developed a survey questionnaire, which was delivered online, anonymously, through SurveyMonkey (November 2012 to April 2013) to clinicians working with people with aphasia in 16 countries across the world. RESULTS: A large number of speech and language therapists responded to the survey, with 19/21 questions answered by 385-579 participants. Clinicians were well informed on what constitutes quality of life and viewed it as a complex construct influenced by health, participation, in/dependence, communication, personal factors, and environmental factors. In their clinical practice, they considered quality of life as important, used informal approaches to explore it and aimed to address quality of life goals; yet, the majority did not evaluate quality of life in a systematic way. CONCLUSION: There is a need for training on quality of life to help speech and language therapists incorporate quality of life outcome measures in their interventions. There is also a need for further research on which interventions improve quality of life in aphasia.

Conversation therapy for aphasia: a qualitative review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: A diverse literature addresses elements of conversation therapy in aphasia including intervention rooted in conversation analysis, partner training, group therapy and behavioural intervention. Currently there is no resource for clinicians or researchers that defines and organizes this information into a coherent synopsis describing various conversation therapy practices. AIMS: To organize information from varied sources into a descriptive overview of conversation therapy for aphasia. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Academic search engines were employed to identify research articles published between 1950 and September 2013 reporting on conversation therapy for aphasia. Thirty articles met criteria for review and were identified as primary sources for the qualitative review. Using qualitative methodology, relevant data were extracted from articles and categories were identified to create a descriptive taxonomy of conversation therapy for aphasia. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: Conversation interventions were divided into descriptive categories including: treatment participants (person with aphasia, partner, dyad), primary guiding orientation (conversation analysis, social model, behavioural, relationship centred), service delivery (individual, group), focus of intervention (generic/individualized; problem/solution oriented; compensatory), training methods (explicit/implicit; external/embedded), activities or tasks, and outcomes measured. Finally, articles were categorized by research design. There was marked variation in conversation therapy approaches and outcome measures reported and a notable gap in information about one-on-one conversation therapy for individuals with aphasia. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This review provides a description of various conversation therapy approaches and identified gaps in the existing literature. Valid measures of natural conversation, research on one-on-one conversation approaches for individuals with aphasia, and a systematic body of evidence consisting of high quality research are needed.

STRENGTH and the Health Care Team: Changing Interprofessional and Client-Centered Practices.

BACKGROUND: Client-centered practice in stroke rehabilitation is strongly influenced by interprofessional team functioning and collaborative goal setting. The hospital context is problematic for client-centered practice and reduces the ability of the health care team and client with stroke to appreciate the impact of stroke on functioning within the home environment. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to trial Stroke Rehabilitation Enhancing and Guiding Transition Home (STRENGTH), an approach to rehabilitation that provides clients, carers, and hospital-based therapists with weekly opportunities to develop goals and undertake therapy sessions in the home and community before hospital discharge. METHODS: Nine participants, comprising 3 occupational therapists, 4 physiotherapists, and 2 speech pathologists, completed a custom-made survey and participated in a semi-structured focus group at the completion of the 6-month trial of STRENGTH. The survey and focus group questioned the participants on their experiences and impressions of STRENGTH. RESULTS: Inductive thematic analysis of the focus group identified 2 themes: "influences of context on team functioning" and "experiences of the program." The quantitative data supported the value of STRENGTH for team functioning and client outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide an overall endorsement for STRENGTH from the therapists' perspectives and highlight the positive impact of environmental context on team functioning, collaborative goal setting, and ultimately client-centered practice.

The use of interpretive description within Kaupapa Maori research.

Kaupapa Maori research (KMR) is an Indigenous research approach that is decolonizing and transformative. Interpretive description (ID) is a qualitative methodology used to generate knowledge relevant to the applied health disciplines. In this article, we discuss how we combined KMR and ID to investigate the experiences of Maori (the Indigenous peoples of New Zealand) with aphasia and their whanau (extended family). This is novel because it is the first time these two approaches have been combined. In the context of aphasia research, we discuss how they work together in theory, and the synergies that became apparent in practice. We conclude that the combination of KMR and ID enables clinicians and Maori with aphasia to learn from each other and work together, thereby generating knowledge that makes a difference for Maori with aphasia and their whanau.

"I Could Not Talk . . . She Did Everything . . . She's Now My Sister": People With Aphasia's Perspectives on Friends Who Stuck Around.

PURPOSE: Aphasia may decrease the capacity to develop and maintain friendships. The aim of this study was to better understand the perspectives of people with aphasia on why some friendship bonds remain strong and some do not. Furthermore, we wanted to explore how age and aphasia severity shape views on friendship. METHOD: We interviewed 27 people with aphasia about their experiences of friendship before and after the onset of aphasia. We then used framework analysis and reflexive thematic analysis to interpret the interview data. RESULTS: From the interviews, we created four major themes concerning how friend relationships had been impacted by aphasia: (a) Not all bonds have the same chance of surviving the onset of aphasia; (b) people with aphasia's closest friends took active steps to keep relationships strong; (c) if friends knew some basic information about aphasia, bonds would stay stronger; (d) positive affective aspects of friendship play an important role in keeping bonds strong. We also noted differences in friendship experiences that appeared to be influenced by age and aphasia severity of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Interview data provided actionable ideas including focusing on friends who are likely to be responsive to help with maintaining the friendship, providing them with strategies to keep the friendship active and communication meaningful, and acknowledging the positive impact that this will have on the friend recovering from aphasia. More research is needed to develop programs that empower people with aphasia to maintain their friendships. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24688671.

Stages of change in adults with acquired hearing impairment seeking help for the first time: application of the transtheoretical model in audiologic rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the application of the transtheoretical (stages-of-change) model in audiologic rehabilitation. More specifically, it described the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA) scores of adults with acquired hearing impairment. It reported the psychometric properties (construct, concurrent, and predictive validity) of the stages-of-change model in this population. DESIGN: At baseline, 153 adults with acquired hearing impairment seeking help for the first time completed the URICA as well as measures of degree of hearing impairment, self-reported hearing disability, and years since hearing impairment onset. Participants were subsequently offered intervention options: hearing aids, communication programs, and no intervention. Their intervention uptake and adherence were assessed 6 months later and their intervention outcomes were assessed 3 months after intervention completion. First, the stages-of-change construct validity was evaluated by investigating the URICA factor structure (principal component analysis), internal consistency, and correlations between stage scores. The URICA scores were reported in terms of the scores for each stage of change, composite scores, stages with highest scores, and stage clusters (cluster analysis). Second, the concurrent validity was assessed by examining associations between stages of change and degree of hearing impairment, self-reported hearing disability, and years since hearing impairment onset. Third, the predictive validity was evaluated by investigating associations between stages of change and intervention uptake, adherence, and outcomes. RESULTS: First, in terms of construct validity, the principal component analysis identified four instead of three stages (precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, and action) for which the internal consistency was good. Most of the sample was in the action stage. Correlations between stage scores supported the model. Cluster analysis identified four stages-of-change clusters, which the authors named active change, initiation, disengagement, and ambivalence. In terms of concurrent validity, participants who reported a more advanced stage of change had a more severe hearing impairment, reported greater hearing disability, and had a hearing impairment for a longer period of time. In terms of predictive validity, participants who reported a more advanced stage of change were more likely to take up an intervention and to report successful intervention outcomes. However, stages of change did not predict intervention adherence. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the sample was in the action stage. The construct, concurrent, and predictive validity of the stages-of-change model were good. The stages-of-change model has some validity in the rehabilitation of adults with hearing impairment. The data support that change might be better represented on a continuum rather than by movement from one step to the next. Of all the measures, the precontemplation stage score had the best concurrent and predictive validity. Therefore, further research should focus on addressing the precontemplation stage with a measure suitable for clinical use.