"I Could Not Talk . . . She Did Everything . . . She's Now My Sister": People With Aphasia's Perspectives on Friends Who Stuck Around.

PURPOSE: Aphasia may decrease the capacity to develop and maintain friendships. The aim of this study was to better understand the perspectives of people with aphasia on why some friendship bonds remain strong and some do not. Furthermore, we wanted to explore how age and aphasia severity shape views on friendship. METHOD: We interviewed 27 people with aphasia about their experiences of friendship before and after the onset of aphasia. We then used framework analysis and reflexive thematic analysis to interpret the interview data. RESULTS: From the interviews, we created four major themes concerning how friend relationships had been impacted by aphasia: (a) Not all bonds have the same chance of surviving the onset of aphasia; (b) people with aphasia's closest friends took active steps to keep relationships strong; (c) if friends knew some basic information about aphasia, bonds would stay stronger; (d) positive affective aspects of friendship play an important role in keeping bonds strong. We also noted differences in friendship experiences that appeared to be influenced by age and aphasia severity of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Interview data provided actionable ideas including focusing on friends who are likely to be responsive to help with maintaining the friendship, providing them with strategies to keep the friendship active and communication meaningful, and acknowledging the positive impact that this will have on the friend recovering from aphasia. More research is needed to develop programs that empower people with aphasia to maintain their friendships. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24688671.

Preventing depression in aphasia: A cluster randomized control trial of the Aphasia Action Success Knowledge (ASK) program.

BACKGROUND: Stroke patients with aphasia and their caregivers have higher incidence of depression than those without aphasia. AIMS: The objective of the study is to determine whether a tailored intervention program (Action Success Knowledge; ASK) led to better mood and quality of life (QoL) outcomes than an attention control with a 12-month end point at cluster and individual participant level. METHODS: A multi-site, pragmatic, two-level single-blind cluster randomized controlled trial compared ASK to an attention control (secondary stroke prevention program). Ten metropolitan and 10 non-metropolitan health regions were randomized. People with aphasia and their family members were recruited within 6 months post-stroke who scored ⩽12 on the Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire Hospital Version-10 at screening. Each arm received manualized intervention over 6-8 weeks followed by monthly telephone calls. Blinded assessments of QoL and depression were taken at 12 months post-onset. RESULTS: Twenty clusters (health regions) were randomized. Trained speech pathologists screened 1744 people with aphasia and 373 participants consented to intervention (n = 231 people with aphasia and 142 family members). The attrition rate after consent was 26% with 86 and 85 participants with aphasia in the ASK arm and attention control arm, respectively, receiving intervention. Of those 171 who did receive treatment, only 41 met the prescribed minimum dose. Multilevel mixed effects modeling under the intention-to-treat protocol showed a significant difference on the Stroke and Aphasia Depression Questionnaire-21 (SADQ-21, N = 122, 17 clusters) in favor of the attention control (ß = -2.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -4.76 to -0.73, p = 0.008). Individual data analysis using a minimal detectable change score for the SADQ-21 showed the difference was not meaningful. CONCLUSION: ASK showed no benefit over attention control in improving mood and preventing depression in people with aphasia or their family members.

Access G-AP: development of an accessible goal setting and action planning resource for stroke survivors with aphasia.

PURPOSE: Goal setting is key to stroke rehabilitation, but access for people with aphasia is challenging. Based on the Goal setting and Action Planning (G-AP) framework, we developed an accessible goal setting resource (Access G-AP). METHODS: Access G-AP was designed using a three-phase, user-centred design process. Phase 1: Access G-AP Draft A was designed using evidence-based recommendations. Phase 2: Draft A was reviewed by stroke survivors with aphasia (focus groups 1&2) and rehabilitation staff (questionnaire). Phase 3: Suggested recommendations informed Access G-AP Draft B, which was further reviewed by stroke survivors with aphasia (focus group 3). The final version of Access G-AP was approved by stroke survivors with aphasia at a debrief meeting. Data were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Recommended design improvements included reducing text, adding bullet points, and diversifying images. Both participant groups highlighted that Access G-AP should be used collaboratively to support stroke survivor involvement. Staff recommended Access G-AP training and additional resources to support stroke survivors with severe aphasia. CONCLUSIONS: Access G-AP was co-developed to support people with aphasia to access and engage in stroke rehabilitation goal setting. Further research is required to establish the feasibility of Access G-AP in clinical practice.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONEvidence-based accessible formatting strategies and an iterative design process can inform the design of accessible goal setting resources.Accessible goal setting materials should be relevant to stroke survivors with aphasia and responsive to their needs.Rehabilitation staff require training and support to use accessible goal setting resources (like Access G-AP) with stroke survivors with aphasia, especially those with severe aphasia.Evaluation of the feasibility of Access G-AP in clinical practice is now required.

A survey of speech pathologists' opinions about the prospective acceptability of an online implementation platform for aphasia services.

BACKGROUND: Online knowledge translation (KT) approaches are becoming increasingly prevalent within healthcare due to their accessibility and facilitation of international support networks. Online platforms enable timely and far-reaching dissemination of current evidence and best-practice recommendations. Although there is potential to improve the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines, it is essential to consider the acceptability of online approaches to healthcare professionals to ensure their successful integration within everyday clinical settings. AIMS: To establish the prospective acceptability of a theoretically informed online intervention for speech pathologists, Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice, that aims to facilitate the implementation of aphasia best practice. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A mixed-methods multinational electronic survey based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) completed by aphasia researchers and clinicians. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: A total of 43 participants completed the survey with 91% (n = 39) indicating that they would use Aphasia Nexus. Understanding the intervention and how it works (intervention coherence as per the TFA) was the key factor influencing the likelihood of integration within everyday clinical practice. Participants identified potential areas where the intervention could influence service change and also recommended further design and content changes to improve the intervention. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable platform for further feasibility testing in the form of a pilot trial within an Australian-based health service. The study progresses the theory of TFA as it was a valuable framework facilitating the identification of prominent factors influencing acceptability. The study also informs further intervention refinements in preparation for the next stage of research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Online strategies have the potential to enhance KT and promote the uptake of rehabilitation guidelines. An online intervention, however, can only be effective if implemented well. For this reason, it is essential to establish the acceptability of online interventions to the intended recipients and therefore increase the likelihood of successful implementation. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study used a theoretically based framework to establish the acceptability of an online implementation intervention, Aphasia Nexus, to multinational aphasia clinicians and researchers. It demonstrated the value in identifying the prominent factors influencing acceptability to inform further intervention refinements and warrant continuing research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Speech pathologists should use online platforms to drive the implementation of best practice on an international scale. It is important for clinicians to have an in-depth understanding of online interventions and how they work to enhance their successful uptake into routine clinical practice. Aphasia Nexus is an acceptable online platform for implementing best practice in aphasia.

Measuring communication as a core outcome in aphasia trials: Results of the ROMA-2 international core outcome set development meeting.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based recommendations for a core outcome set (COS; minimum set of outcomes) for aphasia treatment research have been developed (the Research Outcome Measurement in Aphasia-ROMA, COS). Five recommended core outcome constructs: communication, language, quality of life, emotional well-being and patient-reported satisfaction/impact of treatment, were identified through three international consensus studies. Constructs were paired with outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) during an international consensus meeting (ROMA-1). Before the current study (ROMA-2), agreement had not been reached on OMIs for the constructs of communication or patient-reported satisfaction/impact of treatment. AIM: To establish consensus on a communication OMI for inclusion in the ROMA COS. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Research methods were based on recommendations from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative. Participants with expertise in design and conduct of aphasia trials, measurement instrument development/testing and/or communication outcome measurement were recruited through an open call. Before the consensus meeting, participants agreed on a definition of communication, identified appropriate OMIs, extracted their measurement properties and established criteria for their quality assessment. During the consensus meeting they short-listed OMIs and participants without conflicts of interest voted on the two most highly ranked instruments. Consensus was defined a priori as agreement by ≥ 70% of participants. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: In total, 40 researchers from nine countries participated in ROMA-2 (including four facilitators and three-panel members who participated in pre-meeting activities only). A total of 20 OMIs were identified and evaluated. Eight short-listed communication measures were further evaluated for their measurement properties and ranked. Participants in the consensus meeting (n = 33) who did not have conflicts of interest (n = 29) voted on the top two ranked OMIs: The Scenario Test (TST) and the Communication Activities of Daily Living-3 (CADL-3). TST received 72% (n = 21) of 'yes' votes and the CADL-3 received 28% (n = 8) of 'yes' votes. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Consensus was achieved that TST was the preferred communication OMI for inclusion in the ROMA COS. It is currently available in the original Dutch version and has been adapted into English, German and Greek. Further consideration must be given to the best way to measure communication in people with mild aphasia. Development of a patient-reported measure for satisfaction with/impact of treatment and multilingual versions of all OMIs of the COS is still required. Implementation of the ROMA COS would improve research outcome measurement and the quality, relevance, transparency, replicability and efficiency of aphasia treatment research. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject International consensus has been reached on five core constructs to be routinely measured in aphasia treatment studies. International consensus has also been established for OMIs for the three constructs of language, quality of life and emotional well-being. Before this study, OMIs for the constructs of communication and patient-reported satisfaction/impact of treatment were not established. What this paper adds to existing knowledge We gained international consensus on an OMI for the construct of communication. TST is recommended for inclusion in the ROMA COS for routine use in aphasia treatment research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The ROMA COS recommends OMIs for a minimum set of outcomes for adults with post-stroke aphasia within phases I-IV aphasia treatment research. Although not intended for clinical use, clinicians may employ the instruments of the ROMA COS, considering the quality of their measurement properties. The systematic inclusion of a measure of communication, such as TST, in clinical practice could ultimately support the implementation of research evidence and best practices.

A scoping review of friendship intervention for older adults: lessons for designing intervention for people with aphasia.

PURPOSE: Map the landscape of friendship interventions/programs for older adults to guide intervention/program development inclusive of the unique needs of older people with aphasia (PWA). METHODS: A search query of multiple databases was completed for articles published before 4 January 2021. Studies included all the following: (1) participants aged 55 years or older; (2) addressed an intervention/program designed to prevent social isolation and/or friendship loss; (3) used an outcome variable related to social isolation and/or friendship; and (4) published in a peer-reviewed journal. Title and abstract screening were conducted using Covidence software, which tracked disagreements across the study team. All studies included in the full-text review were identified as relevant by a minimum of two study authors, and a consensus was reached on all full-text reviews. Data were extracted according to (1) theoretical frameworks used; (2) interventionist and discipline; (3) participant characteristics; (4) intervention/program replicability; (5) format of intervention/program; (6) measures used in the intervention/programs; (7) and, reported effects of intervention/programs on individuals. RESULTS: A total of 40 articles with 42 intervention/programs were included and represented 4584 intervention/program participants ranging in age from 40 to 104 years. Intervention/programs involved a wide range of theoretical frameworks (e.g., theories of loneliness, feminist theory, positive psychology). Disciplines such as psychology and exercise science informed intervention/programs. Interventionists included many types of individuals like therapists, volunteers and home health aides. Intervention/programs often lacked adequate description for replication and included individual and group formats, most commonly delievered in the participants homes. Outcomes usually included self-report measures of loneliness, social networks, or well-being, and intervention/programming was primarily educational, activity-based, or networking-based in nature. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention/programs reviewed yield important lessons to support innovation in developing friendship intervention/programs for older PWA as most yielded positive results and were acceptable to participants.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONPeople with aphasia want their friendships addressed as part of their rehabilitation; however, the research literature has little guidance in this area.Studies reviewed of friendship intervention/programs for older adults yielded helpful lessons for consideration in developing this type of intervention/programming for people with aphasia.Interprofessional teams made up of rehabilitation professionals should address friendship for people with aphasia in both research and clinical practice.

Pilot trial of the online implementation intervention Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice.

PURPOSE: Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice is a theoretically-based online implementation intervention designed to overcome the barriers related to the implementation of intensive and comprehensive aphasia services. The objective was to establish the feasibility of incorporating Aphasia Nexus within routine clinical practice through an evaluation of: (1) its potential to positively influence the intensity and/or comprehensiveness of aphasia services; (2) the ability of selected outcome measures to capture changes to factors influencing implementation; and (3) the acceptability of the website to on-site speech-language pathologists (SLPs). METHOD: A single arm pre-post pilot trial was conducted within an Australian health service. The design collected qualitative and quantitative pre-post data in the form of therapy logs, behaviour change questionnaires, and a post-intervention focus group. Data were collected one week prior to, and one week following, a 12 week implementation period where participating SLPs (n = 5) were provided access to the Aphasia Nexus website. RESULT: Quantitative data revealed improvements in the median time per patient with aphasia from 65 to 115 minutes per week (intensity/dose), an additional 50 minutes per week. SLPs trialled at least one new therapy approach (Attentive Reading and Constrained Summarisation) and service delivery model (group therapy) representing an increase in the comprehensiveness of their services to patients. SLPs perceived a reduction in the barriers associated with the promotion of new aphasia services. Qualitative analysis of focus group discussion revealed that participants considered Aphasia Nexus in the overarching theme of practice efficiency (obtaining the best outcome from the least amount of effort) and the sub-themes of accessible therapy resources and the prioritisation of time. CONCLUSION: Overall, Aphasia Nexus was considered a useful clinical tool with the potential to positively influence clinical aphasia practice. These results will inform further implementation intervention refinements and will inform the methodology of future research.

Inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability and internal consistency of the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test.

PURPOSE: To examine the inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability, internal consistency and practice effects associated with a new test, the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. METHODS: Reliability estimates were obtained in a repeated-measures design through analysis of clinician video ratings of stroke participants completing the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. Inter-rater reliability was determined by comparing 15 independent clinicians' scores of 15 randomly selected videos. Intra-rater reliability was determined by comparing two clinicians' scores of 35 videos when re-scored after a two-week interval. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis demonstrated almost perfect inter-rater reliability (0.995; 95% confidence interval: 0.990-0.998), intra-rater reliability (0.994; 95% confidence interval: 0.989-0.997) and internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.940 (95% confidence interval: 0.920-1.0)). Almost perfect correlations (0.998; 95% confidence interval: 0.995-0.999) between face-to-face and video ratings were obtained. CONCLUSION: The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test demonstrates almost perfect inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability and internal consistency. High correlation coefficients and narrow confidence intervals demonstrated minimal practice effects with scoring or influence of years of clinical experience on test scores. Almost perfect correlations between face-to-face and video scoring methods indicate these reliability estimates have direct application to everyday practice. The test is available from brisbanetest.org.Implications for RehabilitationThe Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is a new measure for the assessment of acquired language disorders.The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test demonstrated almost perfect inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability and internal consistency.High reliability estimates and narrow confidence intervals indicated that test ratings vary minimally when administered by clinicians of different experience levels, or different levels of familiarity with the new measure.The test is a reliable measure of language performance for use in clinical practice and research.

Development and diagnostic validation of the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test.

PURPOSE: To describe the development and determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test in detecting aphasia. METHODS: Consecutive acute stroke admissions (n = 100; mean = 66.49y) participated in a single (assessor) blinded cross-sectional study. Index assessment was the ∼45 min Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is further divided into four 15-25 min Short Tests: two Foundation Tests (severe impairment), Standard (moderate) and High Level Test (mild). Independent reference standard included the Language Screening Test, Aphasia Screening Test, Comprehensive Aphasia Test and/or Measure for Cognitive-Linguistic Abilities, treating team diagnosis and aphasia referral post-ward discharge. RESULTS: Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test cut-off score of ≤157 demonstrated 80.8% (LR+ =10.9) sensitivity and 92.6% (LR- =0.21) specificity. All Short Tests reported specificities of ≥92.6%. Foundation Tests I (cut-off ≤61) and II (cut-off ≤51) reported lower sensitivity (≥57.5%) given their focus on severe conditions. The Standard (cut-off ≤90) and High Level Test (cut-off ≤78) reported sensitivities of ≥72.6%. CONCLUSION: The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is a sensitive assessment of aphasia. Diagnostically, the High Level Test recorded the highest psychometric capabilities of the Short Tests, equivalent to the full Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test. The test is available for download from brisbanetest.org.Implications for rehabilitationAphasia is a debilitating condition and accurate identification of language disorders is important in healthcare.Language assessment is complex and the accuracy of assessment procedures is dependent upon a variety of factors.The Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test is a new evidence-based language test specifically designed to adapt to varying patient need, clinical contexts and co-occurring conditions.In this cross-sectional validation study, the Brisbane Evidence-Based Language Test was found to be a sensitive measure for identifying aphasia in stroke.

Development of an online implementation intervention for aphasia clinicians to increase the intensity and comprehensiveness of their service.

PURPOSE: To describe the process and outcome of a user and theory informed online intervention for speech pathologists targeting the implementation of intensive and comprehensive aphasia services. METHODS: The design process followed the eight steps outlined by the Behaviour Change Wheel and incorporated the principles of Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT). Eight speech pathology researchers and clinicians from four countries (Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Ireland) contributed to three focus groups via videoconference. RESULTS: The online platform, Aphasia Nexus: Connecting Evidence to Practice, provides resources, guidance and support for speech pathologists seeking to improve the intensity and comprehensiveness of their aphasia service. A collaborative and iterative design process facilitated the creation of an intervention envisioned by participants. CONCLUSIONS: The website contains both interactive elements and resource links which have been arranged under the three headings of resources, action and support. The inclusion of multi-national researchers and clinicians benefitted a design process to make implementation more likely.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONTheoretically informed implementation interventions aim to change the everyday clinical practice of health workers.An online platform has been developed to support speech pathologists' implementation of intensive and comprehensive aphasia services.A collaborative design process can be beneficial in creating an intervention that is relevant to research-users and is more likely to be implemented.

Core Outcome Set Use in Poststroke Aphasia Treatment Research: Examining Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation Using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

Purpose A core outcome set (COS; an agreed minimum set of outcomes) was developed to address the heterogeneous measurement of outcomes in poststroke aphasia treatment research. Successful implementation of a COS requires change in individual and collective research behavior. We used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to understand the factors influencing researchers' use and nonuse of the Research Outcome Measurement in Aphasia (ROMA) COS. Method Aphasia trialists and highly published treatment researchers were identified from the Cochrane review of speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke and through database searches. Participants completed a theory-informed online survey that explored factors influencing COS use. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis. Results Sixty-four aphasia researchers from 13 countries participated. Most participants (81%) were aware of the ROMA COS, and participants identified more facilitators than barriers to its use. The TDF domain with the highest agreement (i.e., facilitator) was "knowledge" (84% agree/strongly agree). Participants had knowledge of the measures included in the ROMA COS, their associated benefits, and the existing recommendations. The TDF domains with the least agreement (i.e., barriers) were "reinforcement" (34% agree/strongly agree); "social influences" (41% agree/strongly agree); "memory, attention, and decision processes" (45% agree/strongly agree); and "behavioral regulation" (49% agree/strongly agree). Hence, participants identified a lack of external incentives, collegial encouragement, and monitoring systems as barriers to using the ROMA COS. The suitability and availability of individual measurement instruments, as well as burden associated with collecting the COS, were also identified as reasons for nonuse. Conclusions Overall, participants were aware of the benefits of using the ROMA COS and believed that its implementation would improve research quality; however, incentives for routine implementation were reported to be lacking. Findings will guide future revisions of the ROMA COS and the development of theoretically informed implementation strategies. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16528524.

Stroke health professionals' management of depression after post-stroke aphasia: a qualitative study.

Background: People with post-stroke aphasia commonly experience mental health conditions, with depression having a high prevalence. An understanding of current practice may inform ways to improve psychological care for people with aphasia.Aim: To explore current practice for managing depression after post-stroke aphasia from the perspective of stroke health professionals.Method: Five semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 39 stroke health professionals across the care continuum. Focus groups were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the method of Interpretive Description.Results: Analysis of verbatim transcripts revealed four core themes: (1) concomitant aphasia and depression after stroke is a challenging area of rehabilitation, (2) mood difficulties and depression are not always a high stroke rehabilitation priority, (3) approaches to identification and management are ad hoc, and (4) stroke health professionals are trying to bridge the gap between clients' psychological care needs and limited services. Sub-themes were also identified.Conclusion: This study demonstrates that health professionals are challenged by and limited in managing depression after post-stroke aphasia. Health professionals have the opportunity to improve services through the translation of evidence-based interventions. The integration of mental health care into stroke rehabilitation may be achieved through policy development, leadership and specialist training.Implications for rehabilitationPeople with aphasia need routine mood screening using aphasia-specific clinical tools and communication support.Stroke health professionals report a need for communication partner training to facilitate mental healthcare for people with aphasia.Family members need to be involved in aphasia rehabilitation to gain psychological care for themselves and the person with aphasia.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing stepped psychological care for people with aphasia: Perspectives of stroke health professionals.

Background Concomitant aphasia and depression after stroke is highly prevalent, but there is a lack of psychological care in stroke rehabilitation for people with aphasia and family members. Evidence-based frameworks such as stepped psychological care may be viable, but the barriers and facilitators to translating this framework into aphasia rehabilitation practice are unknown.Aim The aim of this study was to identify, from the perspective of stroke health professionals, the barriers and facilitators to implementing stepped psychological care for depression after post-stroke aphasia.Method Five semi-structured focus groups of stroke health professionals were conducted (n = 39) across the stroke care continuum. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using Interpretive Description.Results Barriers and facilitators were identified within three core themes: knowledge, skills, and attitudes have the most impact on implementing stepped psychological care; the physical environment impacts on managing depression and communication disability for people with aphasia; and the support and leadership of the health organization influence change in any implementation of a stepped psychological care approach. Barriers included: no experience with stepped psychological care; limited understanding of aphasia and communication support; lack of adequate physical space and resources; lack of psychologists. Facilitators included: specialist training; enhancement of physical spaces; communication tools; leadership; funding; specialized staff.Conclusion Addressing the identified barriers and facilitators to stepped psychological care will improve the viability of implementing this evidence-based framework after post-stroke aphasia. Change may be driven through specialist training for health professionals in communication support; mood assessment and treatments; modification of physical space; and accessible resources.

"It's like a lifeboat": stakeholder perspectives of an intensive comprehensive aphasia program (ICAP)".

Background: Intensive comprehensive aphasia programs (ICAPs) have gained popularity in recent years. Outcomes from ICAPs have demonstrated measurable improvements for most who take part, but how do people with aphasia and their family members experience an ICAP? Aim: The aim of this paper was to explore, through qualitative interviews, the experiences of persons with aphasia and their family members who took part in an ICAP. Methods & Procedures: Twelve interviews were conducted with persons with aphasia and family members regarding their experiences with the ICAP that they had just completed. Nine persons with aphasia were interviewed with their family members and three chose to take part in the interview alone. The Framework Analysis method was used to identify themes from the transcribed interviews. Outcomes & Results: The interviewees discussed four themes related to treatment, psychosocial environments, physical environments, and outcomes. The interviewees remarked on the challenges that were provided by the treatment and how the treatment was different from previous treatment. Comments were made related to the relationships the participants and families developed within the context of the program. The physical environment allowed for relationships to develop. The interviewees discussed the physical and social environment as important additional factors that contribute to the overall therapeutic effect of the ICAP. Positive outcomes were noted in language skills and psychosocial contexts. Conclusions: Based on interviewees' descriptions of this one ICAP, the concept of a therapeutic milieu was developed to describe how the intersection of the treatment, psychosocial interactions, and physical setting related to outcomes. Interviewees described how the therapeutic milieu of the ICAP was interwoven with the intensive therapy to create a "package" of therapy that led to improved outcomes. Implications for non-ICAP clinical practice is that participants linked more intensive therapy and greater social interactions with better outcomes.

Prognostication in post-stroke aphasia: How do speech pathologists formulate and deliver information about recovery?

BACKGROUND: Prognostication is a complex clinical task that involves forming a prediction about recovery and communicating prognostic information to patients and families. In aphasia, recovery is difficult to predict and evidence-based guidance on prognosis delivery is lacking. Questions about aphasia prognosis commonly arise, but it is unknown how speech pathologists formulate and deliver information about expected recovery. An understanding of current practice in prognostication is needed to develop evidence-based guidelines for this process, and is necessary in order to ensure successful future implementation of recommended practice regarding prognosis delivery. AIMS: To identify the factors speech pathologists consider important when responding to questions about aphasia prognosis; to examine how they respond in different scenarios; and to evaluate their current attitudes towards aphasia prognostication. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A total of 54 speech pathologists participated in an online survey featuring hypothetical aphasia prognosis delivery scenarios, short-response questions and ratings. Open responses were analysed thematically. Multiple-choice responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Speech pathologists regarded factors relating to the nature and severity of post-stroke deficits, an individual's level of motivation and the availability of social support as most important for forming an aphasia prognosis. When delivering prognostic information, considerations of the recipient's emotional well-being, hope and expectations, and comprehension of information were regarded as most important. Speech pathologists' prognosis responses varied in content and manner of communication. The content of the responses included predictions of recovery and information about various attributes and activities contributing to recovery. Prognostic information was most frequently communicated through qualitative probability expressions, general statements and uncertainty-based expressions. A need for more professional support in aphasia prognostication was indicated. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: There is variation in the way speech pathologists respond to questions about aphasia prognosis, and it is unknown how these conversations affect people with aphasia and their significant others. Further research to understand speech pathologists' clinical reasoning and professional support needs, and the perspectives of people living with aphasia, may help to develop an evidence-based approach to prognostication in aphasia. What this paper adds What is already known on this subject Questions about aphasia prognosis are difficult to answer. Current methods for predicting aphasia recovery are yet to demonstrate the reliability and individual specificity required for clinical application. At present, there is no evidence-based guidance or support for prognosis delivery in aphasia. What this study adds to existing knowledge There is variation in the way speech pathologists predict aphasia recovery, the prognostic information they deliver and the manner in which they communicate prognoses. Current approaches to aphasia prognostication are reliant on experience and professional judgement, and speech pathologists desire more support for undertaking this task. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Speech pathologists lack a consistent approach to aphasia prognostication and desire more support in this task. The present findings offer insight into clinician attitudes and practice, and provide a direction for future research to establish best-practice guidelines for this complex and demanding area of aphasia management.

Exploring changing needs following minor stroke.

Medical advances have led to many of the severe consequences of stroke being averted. Consequently, more people are being discharged from hospital following treatment for what is classed as minor stroke. The needs of people with minor stroke have received little research attention. The aim of the current study was to conduct an exploratory prospective needs analysis to document the unmet health, rehabilitation and psychosocial needs of a recently hospitalised minor stroke cohort approximately 2 weeks (T1) and 2 months (T2) post-hospital discharge. An exploratory cohort design was used to explore the unmet health, service and social needs of 20 patients with minor stroke. Participants completed questionnaires (Survey of Unmet Needs and Service Use, Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4, Exeter Identity Transition Scales, RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0) at T1 and T2. Nine participants reported unmet needs at T1 and seven participants reported unmet needs at T2. Between T1 and T2, there was a significant improvement in perceived role limitations due to physical health. Participation in society was significantly better at T2. In conclusion, patients with minor stroke report health, service and social needs that are unmet by existing services. This patient cohort urgently requires co-ordinated services to detect and manage these unmet needs.

The seven habits of highly effective aphasia therapists: The perspective of people living with aphasia.

Purpose: Influential value-driven approaches to aphasia rehabilitation have been proposed previously, but have emphasised how service providers need to deliver their services. The aim of this article is to extract a set of values or habits that define effective aphasia therapists, from a 16-year programme of research that has sought to capture the perspectives of people with aphasia, their family and speech-language pathologists. Method: The findings of 58 studies published by members of our team which have sought the views of people with aphasia (38 studies), speech-language pathologists (11 studies) and family members (5 studies), and those which compared all stakeholder's perspectives (2 studies), were synthesised into seven themes. Presented as habits, these were subsequently described in the same manner as the popular "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People". Result: The seven habits of highly effective aphasia therapists described by people with aphasia and their family were (1) Prioritise relationships; (2) Find a rope team; (3) Begin with the end in mind; (4) Practise SMARTER therapy; (5) Leave no person behind; (6) Look behind the mask and (7) Find a voice. Conclusion: While there are similarities to other value-based approaches to aphasia rehabilitation, these seven habits are detailed using our published research that has privileged the voices of people with aphasia. The seven habits therefore reflect what people with aphasia view as the features of highly effective aphasia therapists. The next steps are to identify how to evaluate evidence-based practices in these areas and ensure their implementation into practice. Effective aphasia therapists are at the heart of effective aphasia rehabilitation.

Fidelity protocol for the Action Success Knowledge (ASK) trial: a psychosocial intervention administered by speech and language therapists to prevent depression in people with post-stroke aphasia.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment fidelity is a complex, multifaceted evaluative process which refers to whether a studied intervention was delivered as intended. Monitoring and enhancing fidelity is one recommendation of the TiDIER (Template for Intervention Description and Replication) checklist, as fidelity can inform interpretation and conclusions drawn about treatment effects. Despite the methodological and translational benefits, fidelity strategies have been used inconsistently within health behaviour intervention studies; in particular, within aphasia intervention studies, reporting of fidelity remains relatively rare. This paper describes the development of a fidelity protocol for the Action Success Knowledge (ASK) study, a current cluster randomised trial investigating an early mood intervention for people with aphasia (a language disability caused by stroke). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A novel fidelity protocol and tool was developed to monitor and enhance fidelity within the two arms (experimental treatment and attention control) of the ASK study. The ASK fidelity protocol was developed based on the National Institutes of Health Behaviour Change Consortium fidelity framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Darling Downs Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee in Queensland, Australia under the National Mutual Acceptance scheme of multicentre human research projects. Specific ethics approval was obtained for those participating sites who were not under the National Mutual Agreement at the time of application. The monitoring and ongoing conduct of the research project is in line with requirements under the National Mutual Acceptance. On completion of the trial, findings from the fidelity reviews will be disseminated via publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12614000979651.

Individualised active communication education (I-ACE): another clinical option for adults with hearing impairment with a focus on problem solving and self-management.

Objective: This clinical note describes the Individualised - Active Communication Education (I-ACE) programme designed to improve problem solving and self-management in adults with hearing impairment. Design: The I-ACE was offered to adult clients seeking help for the first time and effects were measured for participants using self-report questionnaires: the Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (goal attainment), the Hearing Handicap Questionnaire (hearing disability), and the International Outcome Inventory - Alternative Interventions (outcomes) immediately after programme completion and 3 months later. Participants also provided qualitative feedback about I-ACE. Study sample: Twenty-three participants completed I-ACE, with 22 completing all self-report questionnaires and 23 participants providing qualitative feedback. Results: The participants reported positive outcomes and goal attainment, but no change in hearing disability post-programme. The effects were maintained 3 months later. Qualitative feedback indicated that I-ACE supported participants in recognising and increasing awareness of their hearing difficulties and in developing potential solutions to these difficulties. Participants also enjoyed the opportunity to involve communication partners. Conclusion: I-ACE is an appropriate option for adults with hearing impairment who wish to become more aware of their hearing difficulties and how to solve them.

A systematic review of falls in hospital for patients with communication disability: Highlighting an invisible population.

BACKGROUND: Patients with communication disability, associated with impairments of speech, language, or voice, have a three-fold increased risk of adverse events in hospital. However, little research yet examines the causal relationship between communication disability and risk for specific adverse events in hospital. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of a patient's communication disability on their falls risk in hospital. METHODS: This systematic review examined 61 studies on falls of adult hospital patients with communication disability, and patients at high risk of communication disability, to determine whether or not communication disability increased risk for falls, and the nature of and reasons for any increased risk. RESULTS: In total, 46 of the included studies (75%) reported on participants with communication disability, and the remainder included patients with health conditions placing them at high risk for communication disability. Two thirds of the studies examining falls risk identified communication disability as contributing to falls. Commonly, patients with communication disability were actively excluded from participation; measures of communication or cognition were not reported; and reasons for any increased risk of falls were not discussed. CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that communication disability is associated with increased risk of falls. However, the role of communication disability in falls is under-researched, and reasons for the increased risk remain unclear. Practical applications: Including patients with communication disability in falls research is necessary to determine reasons for their increased risk of adverse events in hospital. Their inclusion might be helped by the involvement of speech-language pathologists in falls research teams.