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 In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials we also handsearched theInternational Journal of Language and Communication Disorders(1969 to 2005) and reference lists of relevant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.REF Eligible with Permitted Exceptio

Digital support for self-management and meaningful activities of people with mild dementia:Development, implementation and feasibility of a person-centred touch-screen intervention

This thesis reports on the research that was conducted to develop and pilot test a person-centred touchscreen-based program (FindMyApps intervention) that supports people with mild dementia and their informal carers in how to use a tablet and apps for self-management and meaningful activities. The program consists of the FindMyApps training for informal carers in supporting people with mild dementia in using a tablet and the FindMyApps selection tool designed to help people with mild dementia find apps for self-management and meaningful activities that fit their needs, wishes and abilities. The program was developed following the Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework for the design and evaluation of complex interventions and in co-creation with end users. The chapters of this thesis describe the first three phases of this framework i.e.: the preclinical or theoretical phase (0); the modelling phase (I) and the exploratory trial (II). The execution of an RCT (III), and further implementation (IV) in case the intervention proves effective, are beyond the scope of this thesis. In the first phase user needs studies were performed to identify user requirements for desired self-management and meaningful activities and to identify user-requirements related to the use of apps. Eight focus groups were performed in which people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia (n=13) and informal carers (n=15) participated. We also conducted a literature review to explore which training interventions are most effective for people with mild dementia in (re)learning how to use technologies, including handheld touchscreen devices. An electronic search was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, APA PsycInfo (EBSCO) and CINAHL (EBSCO). In total 16 studies met the inclusion criteria. Our review contributed to the growing amount of promising evidence on the potential impact of Errorless learning training interventions for people with mild to moderate dementia in (re)learning how to use technology. Based on these results we developed the FindMyApps training. In the second phase of the framework we developed a first concept of the FindMyApps selection tool based on identified user requirements. To ensure its usability, the web-based tool was developed using a ‘user-participatory design’ involving the close collaboration of potential users, a development team (researchers, developers and designers) and an expert team (experts in person-centred dementia care and ICT). In three short iterative rounds – so called ‘sprints’ – the users (people with dementia (n=8) and (in)formal carers (n=10)) were invited to test whether the prototypes were in line with their needs, wishes and abilities. This generated important insights into user-interface aspects relating to (i) useful content and (ii) a user-friendly tool design. In the third phase we pilot tested the FindMyApps intervention by means of individual semi-structured interviews and a pilot randomized controlled exploratory trial. Twenty people with mild dementia and informal carer dyads were randomly assigned to the FindMyApps group (n=10), receiving either the FindMyApps training and selection tool, or a control condition (n=10), receiving only a short tablet training. Pre- and post-test measurements at a three month follow-up, consisted of questionnaires and post-test semi-structured interviews. Based on the qualitative results and the effect sizes on the outcomes measured in this study, we consider that the FindMyApps intervention has the potential to positively influence the self-management and engagement in meaningful activities in people with dementia. Future studies with a larger sample should better indicate whether this expectation can be confirmed. The intervention will be further improved and tested in a larger pilot-RCT study and its effectiveness subsequently evaluated in a definite RCT