Literature DB >> 27506677

Constraint-Induced Aphasia Therapy in the Acute Stage: What Is the Key Factor for Efficacy? A Randomized Controlled Study.

Hartwig Woldag1, Nancy Voigt2, Maria Bley3, Horst Hummelsheim2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Constraint-induced aphasia therapy (CIAT) has proven effective in patients with subacute and chronic forms of aphasia. It has remained unclear, however, whether intensity of therapy or constraint is the relevant factor. Data about intensive speech and language therapy (SLT) are conflicting.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the effective component of CIAT and assess the feasibility of SLT in the acute stage after stroke.
METHOD: A total of 60 patients with aphasia (68.2 ± 11.7 years) were enrolled 18.9 days after first-ever stroke. They were randomly distributed into 3 groups: (1) CIAT group receiving therapy for 3 hours per day (10 workdays, total 30 hours); (2) conventional communication treatment group, with same intensity without constraints; and (3) control group receiving individual therapy twice a day as well as group therapy (total 14 hours). Patients were assessed pretreatment and posttreatment using the Aachener Aphasia Test (primary end point: token test) and the Communicative Activity Log (CAL).
RESULTS: Pretreatment, there were no between-group differences. Posttreatment, all groups showed significant improvements without between-group differences.
CONCLUSION: It was found that 14 hours of aphasia therapy administered within 2 weeks as individual therapy, focusing on individual deficits, combined with group sessions has proven to be most efficient. This approach yielded the same outcome as 30 hours of group therapy, either in the form of CIAT or group therapy without constraints. SLT in an intensive treatment schedule is feasible and was well tolerated in the acute stage after stroke.
© The Author(s) 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  communication disorders; language and speech disorder rehabilitation; stroke

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27506677     DOI: 10.1177/1545968316662707

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair        ISSN: 1545-9683            Impact factor:   3.919


  8 in total

Review 1.  [New aspects of neurorehabilitation: motor and language].

Authors:  J Liepert; C Breitenstein
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 2.  Advances and Innovations in Aphasia Treatment Trials.

Authors:  Shauna Berube; Argye E Hillis
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 3.  Constraint-induced aphasia therapy for patients with aphasia: A systematic review.

Authors:  Guandong Wang; Li Ge; Qingxiang Zheng; Pingping Huang; Jing Xiang
Journal:  Int J Nurs Sci       Date:  2020-05-28

4.  Is Aphasia Treatment Beneficial for the Elderly? A Review of Recent Evidence.

Authors:  Rachel Fabian; Lisa Bunker; Argye E Hillis
Journal:  Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep       Date:  2020-09-18

Review 5.  Constraint-induced aphasia therapy in post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Jiaqi Zhang; Jiadan Yu; Yong Bao; Qing Xie; Yang Xu; Junmei Zhang; Pu Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-28       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Where are aphasia theory and management "headed"?

Authors:  Donna C Tippett; Argye E Hillis
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-07-03

7.  Constrained-Induced Dysarthria Therapy: Case Report.

Authors:  Stijn Roggeman; Chris Truyers; Iwona Safin; Eline Huysman; Bernard Dan
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2019-02-28

Review 8.  Neuroplasticity and aphasia treatments: new approaches for an old problem.

Authors:  Bruce Crosson; Amy D Rodriguez; David Copland; Julius Fridriksson; Lisa C Krishnamurthy; Marcus Meinzer; Anastasia M Raymer; Venkatagiri Krishnamurthy; Alexander P Leff
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2019-05-04       Impact factor: 10.154

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.