Search

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 [greater than or equal to] 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.

Background: The increase in the number of reported conversation partner programmes for conversation partners of people with aphasia demonstrates increased awareness of partner needs and the positive effect of trained partners on the communicative abilities of the person with aphasia. Predominantly small-scale studies describe the effectiveness of conversation partner training (CPT) and how partners perceive this training. The view of partners on this service commission remains largely unknown. Aims: To explore the experiences of partners of people with aphasia with a CPT programme when it was newly introduced into rehabilitation settings. Methods & Procedures: Seventeen partners of people with aphasia were interviewed using a semi-structured format about their experience with Partners of Aphasic Clients Conversation Training (PACT). Transcribed interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Outcomes & Results: Four categories representative of the practical nature and individual tailoring of PACT were identified: engaging with PACT; learning from PACT; reflecting on behaviour and emotions; and experiences with earlier speech and language therapy (SLT). Two themes were identified cutting across all categories: the nature of communication is difficult to grasp; and balancing roles as partner, carer and client. Conclusions & Implications: Partners appreciated the training programme once their initial lack of awareness of the interactive nature of communication had been addressed. SLTs need to be clear about the collaborative nature of conversations and what can be offered within the rehabilitation trajectory to address conversation alongside language training.

Background The increase in the number of reported conversation partner programmes for conversation partners of people with aphasia demonstrates increased awareness of partner needs and the positive effect of trained partners on the communicative abilities of the person with aphasia. Predominantly small-scale studies describe the effectiveness of conversation partner training (CPT) and how partners perceive this training. The view of partners on this service commission remains largely unknown. Aims To explore the experiences of partners of people with aphasia with a CPT programme when it was newly introduced into rehabilitation settings. Methods & Procedures Seventeen partners of people with aphasia were interviewed using a semi-structured format about their experience with Partners of Aphasic Clients Conversation Training (PACT). Transcribed interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Outcomes & Results Four categories representative of the practical nature and individual tailoring of PACT were identified: engaging with PACT; learning from PACT; reflecting on behaviour and emotions; and experiences with earlier speech and language therapy (SLT). Two themes were identified cutting across all categories: the nature of communication is difficult to grasp; and balancing roles as partner, carer and client. Conclusions & Implications Partners appreciated the training programme once their initial lack of awareness of the interactive nature of communication had been addressed. SLTs need to be clear about the collaborative nature of conversations and what can be offered within the rehabilitation trajectory to address conversation alongside language training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Aphasia rehabilitation should comprise a family-centred approach, involving main conversation partners in the rehabilitation process as soon as possible. A standardised approach to conversation partner training (CPT) became available in the Netherlands with the release of Partners of Aphasic clients Conversation Training (PACT). PACT was introduced in clinical practice in a multi-centre implementation study with 34 participating dyads. Aims: To explore candidacy for CPT by describing the characteristics of dyads where the conversation partner engaged in CPT and to identify which characteristics had the potential to predict benefit of PACT. Methods and Procedures: A pre-post treatment design was used in a multi-centre study. Pre- and post-CPT measures of psychosocial characteristics (caregiver burden, depression and coping) from the partner and behavioural characteristics (cognitive, linguistic and communicative) from the person with aphasia (PWA) were collected. Partner experience was assessed using four scales from the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory. Pre-post measures were analysed using paired T-tests and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests. Multiple regression analyses were used to assess potential predictors of training outcomes. Outcomes and Results: Partners of people with moderate to severe aphasia engaged in PACT when it was first introduced in clinical practice (N = 34 dyads). Mean time post-onset was 11.5 months. Partners enjoyed the practical training in which they actively engaged through experiential learning methods. Partner scores increased significantly over the intervention time on task-oriented and avoidance-oriented coping skills and their symptoms of depression lowered significantly. Caregiver esteem was found to be a positive predictor of feelings of competence and enjoyment with the training. Older partners enjoyed the training less. More effort was given to the training by the partner when the aphasia was more severe. Conclusions: This study found that partners are willing to engage in CPT once the PWA returned home and the dyads were engaging in more everyday conversations in their home environment. The results underline the importance of partner characteristics, such as motivation, coping style and a positive outlook on caregiving as possible selection criteria for CPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]