Anna Copley1, Kathleen Smith1, Katelyn Savill1, Emma Finch1,2,3. 1. a School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane , QLD , Australia . 2. b Speech Pathology Department, Princess Alexandra Hospital , Brisbane , QLD , Australia , and. 3. c Centre for Functioning and Health Research, Metro South Hospital and Health Service , Brisbane , QLD , Australia.
Abstract
AIMS: To investigate if metacognitive strategy instruction (MSI) improves the receptive language skills of adults with cognitive-communication disorders secondary to acquired brain injury (ABI). RESEARCH DESIGN: An ABA intervention programme was implemented with eight adults with ABI, aged 25-70 years. The Measure of Cognitive-Linguistic Abilities (MCLA) was administered at baseline and following treatment. The treatment employed in this study involved three components: individual goal-based therapy, group remediation therapy using self-instruction and home practice. RESULTS: No receptive language sub-tests of the MCLA reached statistical significance. However, participants' raw score improvements in receptive language sub-tests indicated that MSI may be effective at remediating CCDs following ABI. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings indicate that MSI may be effective in improving receptive language skills in adults with CCDs following ABI. Further research involving a more rigorous study, a larger sample size and a more reliable outcome measure is necessary and may provide statistically significant evidence for the effectiveness of MSI for remediating receptive language disorders.
AIMS: To investigate if metacognitive strategy instruction (MSI) improves the receptive language skills of adults with cognitive-communication disorders secondary to acquired brain injury (ABI). RESEARCH DESIGN: An ABA intervention programme was implemented with eight adults with ABI, aged 25-70 years. The Measure of Cognitive-Linguistic Abilities (MCLA) was administered at baseline and following treatment. The treatment employed in this study involved three components: individual goal-based therapy, group remediation therapy using self-instruction and home practice. RESULTS: No receptive language sub-tests of the MCLA reached statistical significance. However, participants' raw score improvements in receptive language sub-tests indicated that MSI may be effective at remediating CCDs following ABI. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings indicate that MSI may be effective in improving receptive language skills in adults with CCDs following ABI. Further research involving a more rigorous study, a larger sample size and a more reliable outcome measure is necessary and may provide statistically significant evidence for the effectiveness of MSI for remediating receptive language disorders.
Entities:
Keywords:
Acquired brain injury; cognitive communication disorders; metacognitive strategy instruction; receptive language; speech language pathologists