Cuperus, Pauline

de Aguiar, Vânia

de Kok, Dörte

Nickels, Lyndsey

English

Using aphasia therapy apps could be a means of meeting clinical recommendations for aphasia therapy related to dose and frequency. We currently know little about speech and language therapists’ (SLTs) experiences and perceptions of using therapy apps. Making use of a survey, the current study therefore aimed to answer three main research questions:1.  What are SLTs’ current experiences with regards to aphasia therapy apps?2. What are SLTs’ perceptions of PWA’s smartphone/tablet use and the suitability of online, independent therapy for this target group?3.  What do SLTs perceive to be facilitators and barriers to the use of aphasia therapy apps?Our survey respondents consisted of 29 Australian (mean age=35.5 years, 28 female) and 35 Dutch (mean age=36.2 years, 32 female) SLTs.Surveyed SLTs were very positive towards aphasia therapy apps. Encouragingly, they report frequent smartphone/tablet use even in their relatively elderly caseloads and were confident in their clients’ abilities to use aphasia therapy apps independently at home. We therefore conclude that there is plenty of support in the SLT community for increasing the use of aphasia therapy apps, and this could be a means of meeting clinical recommendations regarding intensity and dose of treatment.Nevertheless, our respondents also quite clearly indicated some barriers that they had experienced regarding the use of therapy apps. While it is not within researchers’ power to tackle all of these, the onus is on aphasia researchers and app developers to listen and respond to SLTs’ experiences and feedback and to improve the design of their digital therapies accordingly. The extensive feedback that we have received clearly underlines the importance of directly involving clinicians in the aphasia app development process.</p

ARTS repository - University of Groningen

   University of GroningenThe Experiences and Preferences of Speech and Language Therapists Regarding AphasiaTherapy AppsCuperus, Pauline; de Kok, Dörte; de Aguiar, Vânia; Nickels, LyndseyPublished in:EasyChair preprintsIMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.Document VersionEarly version, also known as pre-printPublication date:2021Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research databaseCitation for published version (APA):Cuperus, P., de Kok, D., de Aguiar, V., & Nickels, L. (2021). The Experiences and Preferences of Speechand Language Therapists Regarding Aphasia Therapy Apps. EasyChair preprints, [6553].CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license.More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne-amendment.Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.EasyChair Preprint№ 6553The Experiences and Preferences of Speech andLanguage Therapists Regarding Aphasia TherapyAppsPauline Cuperus, Dörte de Kok, Vânia de Aguiar andLyndsey NickelsEasyChair preprints are intended for rapiddissemination of research results and areintegrated with the rest of EasyChair.September 7, 2021The experiences and preferences of speech and language therapists regarding aphasia therapy apps  Pauline Cuperus1, 2, 3*, Dörte de Kok1, Vânia de Aguiar1, & Lyndsey Nickels2   1 Center for Language and Cognition, Faculty of Arts, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands 2 Department of Cognitive Science, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia 3 International Doctorate for Experimental Approaches to Language and Brain (IDEALAB), Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia; University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany; University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands   *Corresponding author, p.a.cuperus@rug.nl   Word count: 498  Introduction People with aphasia (PWA) benefit from speech and language therapy that is administered frequently and preferably over a long period of time (Brady et al., 2016). In reality, this is often difficult to achieve for reasons including therapist availability, financial load, and physical impairments. Using aphasia therapy apps could be a means of meeting clinical recommendations related to dose and frequency (Brady et al., 2016). We currently know little about speech and language therapists’ (SLTs) experiences and perceptions of using therapy apps. This information is, however, essential in order to design products that meet the users’ needs (Bannon, 1986; Norman & Draper, 1986; Swales et al., 2016) and that are therefore more likely to be used in clinical practice. The current study therefore aimed to answer three main research questions: 1.  What are SLTs’ current experiences with regards to aphasia therapy apps? 2. What are SLTs’ perceptions of PWA’s smartphone/tablet use and the suitability of online, independent therapy for this target group? 3.  What do SLTs perceive to be facilitators and barriers to the use of aphasia therapy apps?   Method Participants were recruited from Australia and The Netherlands. All respondents self-identified as SLTs and/or clinical linguists. The survey contained 4 open and 12 multiple choice questions pertaining to our research questions and was presented in Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Provo, UT).   Results  Our survey respondents consisted of 29 Australian (mean age=35.5 years, 28 female) and 35 Dutch SLTs (mean age=36.2 years, 32 female).  Table 1 shows the responses to those multiple choice questions most relevant to our research questions.  [Place Table 1 about here]    The open questions resulted in extensive feedback regarding current experiences with therapy apps and SLTs’ opinions regarding future therapy apps. The most frequently cited facilitators for increasing the use of aphasia therapy apps were user-friendliness, targeting different language modalities and using apps as an addition to regular therapy. The most frequently reported barriers were the costs, the client potentially not owning a tablet and the client’s computer (il)literacy.   Conclusion To summarise, surveyed SLTs were very positive towards aphasia therapy apps. Encouragingly, they report frequent smartphone/tablet use even in their relatively elderly caseloads and were confident in their clients’ abilities to use aphasia therapy apps independently at home. We therefore conclude that there is plenty of support in the SLT community for increasing the use of aphasia therapy apps, and this could be a means of meeting clinical recommendations regarding intensity and dose of treatment (Brady et al., 2016).   Nevertheless, our respondents also quite clearly indicated some barriers that they had experienced regarding the use of therapy apps. While it is not within researchers’ power to tackle all of these, the onus is on aphasia researchers and app developers to listen and respond to SLTs’ experiences and feedback and to improve the design of their digital therapies accordingly. In line with Swales et al. (2016), the extensive feedback that we have received clearly underlines the importance of directly involving clinicians in the aphasia app development process.   References Bannon, L. J. (1986). Issues in Design: Some Notes. In D. A. Norman & S. W. Draper      (Eds.), User centered system design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.,         Publishers. Brady, M. C., Kelly, H., Godwin, J., Enderby, P., & Campbell, P. (2016). Speech and        language therapy for aphasia following stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic  Reviews 6(1) Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. W. (Eds.). (1986). User centered system design. Lawrence  Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA. https://www.qualtrics.com. Swales, M. A., Hill, A. J., & Finch, E. (2016). Feature rich, but user-friendly: Speech   pathologists’ preferences for computer-based aphasia therapy. International Journal of   Speech-Language Pathology, 18(4), 315–328.     Table 1  Overview of responses to some of the multiple choice questions  Question Responses Are you generally open to using aphasia therapy apps? Not at all A little Quite a bit Definitely AUa - 0% NLb - 0% 6.9% 2.9% 17.4% 31.4% 75.9% 65.7%  For how many of your clients do you use apps as part of the aphasia therapy? None Some Most (Nearly) all AU - 0% NL - 11.4% 58.6% 60.0% 24.1% 20.0% 17.2% 8.6%   In your experience, how often do people with aphasia use smartphones / tablets Never Monthly Weekly Daily Multiple times per day AU - 3.4% NL - 3.0% 3.4% 3.0% 24.1% 30.3% 58.6% 51.5% 10.3% 12.1%  How frequently do you think a person with aphasia would be able to practice therapy material independent-ly using a Never Monthly Once a week 2-3 times per week > 3 times per week AU - 0% NL - 5.7% 0% 0% 3.4% 0% 10.3% 28.6% 86.2% 65.7% therapy app? a AU = Australian responses b NL = Dutch responses 

The Experiences and Preferences of Speech and Language Therapists Regarding Aphasia Therapy Apps

https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/182899802/EasyChair_Preprint_6553.pdf

The Experiences and Preferences of Speech and Language Therapists Regarding Aphasia Therapy Apps

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ARTS repository - University of Groningen