Theory-driven treatment modifications: A discussion on meeting the linguistic, cognitive, and psychosocial needs of individual clients with aphasia

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Journal of Communication Disorders Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2023.106327
Kristen Nunn, Sofia Vallila-Rohter
{"title":"Theory-driven treatment modifications: A discussion on meeting the linguistic, cognitive, and psychosocial needs of individual clients with aphasia","authors":"Kristen Nunn,&nbsp;Sofia Vallila-Rohter","doi":"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2023.106327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is a growing body of literature demonstrating that language rehabilitation can improve naming impairments for individuals with aphasia. However, there are challenges applying evidence-based research to clinical practice. Well-controlled clinical studies often consist of homogenous samples and exclude individuals who may confound group-level results. Consequently, the findings may not generalize to the diverse clients serviced by speech-language therapists. Within evidence-based guidelines, clinicians can leverage their experiences and theoretical rationale to adapt interventions to meet the needs of individual clients. However, modifications to evidence-based interventions should not alter aspects of treatment that are necessary to produce change within the treatment target. The current discussion paper uses errorless learning, errorful learning, and retrieval practice for naming in aphasia to model how treatment theories can guide clinicians in making theory-informed modifications to interventions. First, we briefly describe the learning mechanisms hypothesized to underlie errorless learning, errorful learning, and retrieval practice. Next, we identify ways clinicians can provide targeted supports to optimize learning for individual clients. The paper ends with a reflection on how well-defined treatment theories can facilitate the generation of practice-based evidence and clinically relevant decision making.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49175,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication Disorders","volume":"103 ","pages":"Article 106327"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10247540/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992423000278","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

There is a growing body of literature demonstrating that language rehabilitation can improve naming impairments for individuals with aphasia. However, there are challenges applying evidence-based research to clinical practice. Well-controlled clinical studies often consist of homogenous samples and exclude individuals who may confound group-level results. Consequently, the findings may not generalize to the diverse clients serviced by speech-language therapists. Within evidence-based guidelines, clinicians can leverage their experiences and theoretical rationale to adapt interventions to meet the needs of individual clients. However, modifications to evidence-based interventions should not alter aspects of treatment that are necessary to produce change within the treatment target. The current discussion paper uses errorless learning, errorful learning, and retrieval practice for naming in aphasia to model how treatment theories can guide clinicians in making theory-informed modifications to interventions. First, we briefly describe the learning mechanisms hypothesized to underlie errorless learning, errorful learning, and retrieval practice. Next, we identify ways clinicians can provide targeted supports to optimize learning for individual clients. The paper ends with a reflection on how well-defined treatment theories can facilitate the generation of practice-based evidence and clinically relevant decision making.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
理论驱动的治疗修改:关于满足失语症患者的语言、认知和心理社会需求的讨论
越来越多的文献表明,语言康复可以改善失语症患者的命名障碍。然而,将循证研究应用于临床实践存在挑战。控制良好的临床研究通常由同质样本组成,并排除可能混淆组水平结果的个体。因此,这些发现可能无法推广到言语语言治疗师所服务的不同客户。在循证指南中,临床医生可以利用他们的经验和理论基础来调整干预措施,以满足个人客户的需求。然而,对循证干预措施的修改不应改变治疗目标内产生变化所需的治疗方面。目前的讨论论文使用无错误学习、错误学习和失语症命名的检索实践来模拟治疗理论如何指导临床医生对干预措施进行理论知情的修改。首先,我们简要描述了假设为无错误学习、错误学习和检索实践基础的学习机制。接下来,我们确定临床医生可以提供有针对性的支持的方式,以优化个人客户的学习。论文最后反思了定义明确的治疗理论如何促进基于实践的证据的生成和临床相关决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Communication Disorders
Journal of Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
71
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Communication Disorders publishes original articles on topics related to disorders of speech, language and hearing. Authors are encouraged to submit reports of experimental or descriptive investigations (research articles), review articles, tutorials or discussion papers, or letters to the editor ("short communications"). Please note that we do not accept case studies unless they conform to the principles of single-subject experimental design. Special issues are published periodically on timely and clinically relevant topics.
期刊最新文献
Dynamic assessment of word learning as a predictor of response to vocabulary intervention Editorial Board Shifting from a female-dominated profession: The perceptions and experiences of male students in communication sciences and disorders Cognitive processing biases of social anxiety in adults who do and do not stutter Linguistic factors associated with stuttering-like disfluencies in Japanese preschool and school-aged children who stutter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1