Imitation-based aphasia therapy increases narrative content: a case series.
E Susan Duncan, Steven L Small
PMID 28393551WHAT IT FOUND
In 18 people with chronic aphasia, intensive imitation-based therapy was followed by more correct information units and a higher percent of words carrying correct information in an untrained Cinderella narrative.
No control group means causation is not proven.
Key findings
01After therapy, the mean increase in number of correct information units during the Cinderella narrative was 34.36, with a range of -58 to 129 and p=0.009.
02The mean increase in percent of correct information units was 3.99, with a range of -15.01 to 15.20 and p=0.023.
03No predictor was selected for change in number of correct information units, while number of therapy sessions completed predicted change in percent of correct information units (r=+0.542; p=0.020).
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat 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
This was a case series with no control group, so the observed changes cannot be separated from practice effects or other unmeasured factors. Only 18 participants were analysed for the main therapy comparison, and 17 were available for one post-therapy comparison, so the study is small. Individual response varied widely: change in number of correct information units ranged from -58 to 129. Baseline scores were variable despite no statistically significant pre-therapy difference, and only two pre-therapy points were used. Compliance varied, and the association between more completed sessions and greater percent improvement may not be causal. No predictor was found for change in number of correct information units, and attention or other unmeasured variables may have influenced both attendance and performance.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that imitation-based therapy causes narrative improvement in chronic aphasia. This was a single-group case series with no control group, only 18 analysed participants, and individual change in correct information units ranged from -58 to 129.