A scoping review and thematic analysis on coping strategies used by people with aphasia.
Courtney C Jewell, Natalie G Freitag, Grace E Terry and 1 others
PMID 40896470WHAT IT FOUND
People with aphasia most commonly rely on cognitive strategies like acceptance and self-efficacy, but these work alongside social support and community access.
Therapists should assess and target these internal attitudes and external resources together rather than focusing on language impairment alone.
Key findings
01Cognitive strategies were the most frequently identified coping theme, present in 16 of the 19 included articles.
02Social support was the second most common theme (11 articles), with participants prioritizing the quality of a few close relationships over the size of their network.
03Coping strategies are interconnected; for example, accessing community groups often relies on external resources like transportation and social support.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review excluded studies on 'living successfully with aphasia,' which may have omitted strategies related to broader adaptation and positive outcomes. Most included studies were qualitative and relied on interviews, which means people with severe language impairments were likely excluded from the primary data. The authors did not assess the quality of the included studies, which is common in scoping reviews but means the reliability of the original findings varies. Only the first author screened all abstracts and full texts, introducing potential bias despite inter-rater checks on a subset.
Declared interests
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret these themes as evidence that specific coping interventions work. This is a scoping review of qualitative descriptions, not a trial of treatments. It maps what people do, not what helps them recover.