Using the Medical Research Council framework and public involvement in the development of a communication partner training intervention for people with primary progressive aphasia (PPA): Better Conversations with PPA.

BACKGROUND: Primary progressive aphasia is a language-led dementia resulting in a gradual dissolution of language. Primary progressive aphasia has a significant psychosocial impact on both the person and their families. Speech and language therapy is one of the only available management options, and communication partner training interventions offer a practical approach to identify strategies to support conversation. The aim of this study was to define and refine a manual and an online training resource for speech and language therapists to deliver communication partner training to people with primary progressive aphasia and their communication partners called Better Conversations with primary progressive aphasia. METHODS: The Better Conversations with primary progressive aphasia manual and training program were developed using the Medical Research Council framework for developing complex interventions. The six-stage development process included 1. Exploratory review of existing literature including principles of applied Conversation Analysis, behaviour change theory and frameworks for chronic disease self-management, 2. Consultation and co-production over 12 meetings with the project steering group comprising representatives from key stakeholder groups, 3. Development of an initial draft, 4. Survey feedback followed by a consensus meeting using the Nominal Group Techniques with a group of speech and language therapists, 5. Two focus groups to gather opinions from people with PPA and their families were recorded, transcribed and Thematic Analysis used to examine the data, 6. Refinement. RESULTS: Co-production of the Better Conversations with primary progressive aphasia resulted in seven online training modules, and a manual describing four communication partner training intervention sessions with accompanying handouts. Eight important components of communication partner training were identified in the aggregation process of the Nominal Group Technique undertaken with 36 speech and language therapists, including use of video feedback to focus on strengths as well as areas of conversation breakdown. Analysis of the focus groups held with six people with primary progressive aphasia and seven family members identified three themes 1) Timing of intervention, 2) Speech and language therapists' understanding of types of dementia, and 3) Knowing what helps. These data informed refinements to the manual including additional practice activities and useful strategies for the future. CONCLUSIONS: Using the Medical Research Council framework to develop an intervention that is underpinned by a theoretical rationale of how communication partner training causes change allows for the key intervention components to be strengthened. Co-production of the manual and training materials ensures the intervention will meet the needs of people with primary progressive aphasia and their communication partners. Gathering further data from speech and language therapists and people living with primary progressive aphasia and their families to refine the manual and the training materials enhances the feasibility of delivering this in preparation for a phase II NHS-based randomised controlled pilot-feasibility study, currently underway.

A feasibility randomised waitlist-controlled trial of a personalised multi-level language treatment for people with aphasia: The remote LUNA study.

BACKGROUND: Stroke survivors with aphasia want to improve their everyday talking (discourse). In current UK practice, 90% of speech and language therapists believe discourse assessment and treatment is part of their role but are hampered by barriers in resources, time and expertise. There is a clinical need for well-articulated discourse assessment and treatments. LUNA is a multi-level treatment targeting words, sentences and discourse macrostructure in personal stories that addresses this clinical need. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of LUNA trial procedures in a randomised waitlist-controlled trial; and to evaluate preliminary efficacy. METHODS: This paper reports a phase II, waitlist-controlled, proof-of-concept feasibility trial. Participants with chronic aphasia (n = 28) were recruited from the community and randomised to an Immediate (n = 14) or Delayed (n = 14) group. LUNA treatment was delivered twice weekly for 10 weeks via the videoconferencing technology, Zoom. Feasibility was assessed in terms of participant recruitment and retention, adherence, missing data, and treatment fidelity. Preliminary treatment efficacy was assessed in terms of between group differences in outcome measures relating to discourse, language, and psychosocial state. RESULTS: The remote LUNA trial was feasible: 85% of those eligible consented to the trial; trial retention was 86%; 87% of treatment sessions were delivered as scheduled, and 79% of participants completed 80%+ of the treatment programme; data was missing only for participants who withdrew; treatment fidelity was high at 92% adherence; and only one clinical outcome measure demonstrated ceiling effects. ANCOVA analysis of the clinical outcome measures revealed group differences with medium and large effect sizes, indicating, improvements in the production of words, sentences, discourse macrostructure, overall language functioning (WAB-R), and psychosocial state (VAMS) following LUNA treatment. For most outcomes measured, similar treatment benefits were suggested in a secondary, non-parametric analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Large-scale evaluation of the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of LUNA is warranted and supported by these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registration: NCT05847023 (clinical trials.gov).