Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT03514186
NCT03514186
Completed
N/A

The Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Program (ICAP): A Randomized Clinical Trial

Shirley Ryan AbilityLab1 site in 1 country56 target enrollmentJuly 15, 2015
ConditionsAphasiaStroke

Overview

Phase
N/A
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Aphasia
Sponsor
Shirley Ryan AbilityLab
Enrollment
56
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Language Quotient of the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised (WAB-R LQ)
Status
Completed
Last Updated
3 years ago

Overview

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to conduct a randomized clinical trial that assesses the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Program (ICAP), specifically focusing on the variable of intensity. Half of the participants will receive 60 hours of intensive treatment over three weeks, while the other half will receive the same amount and type of comprehensive treatment distributed over 15 weeks.

Detailed Description

Recent research has emphasized the need for intensive aphasia treatment in order to make the long-term neuroplastic changes associated with recovery and rehabilitation following a stroke. Furthermore, studies have indicated that intensive aphasia treatment is more efficacious than less intensive treatment. Rather than being influenced by such evidence, the reality is that public and private payers are drastically reducing services to persons with aphasia (PWA). Legislation has seriously curtailed the amount of treatment a PWA may receive after hospitalization. Often patients are eligible for only a limited number of treatment sessions over a limited period of time. In some cases, they may not receive any treatment for their communication disorder following their acute hospitalization. Reduced resources (e.g. transportation difficulties, therapist shortages in rural areas) also may severely limit available services. The Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Program (ICAP) may be a creative, cost-effective and sustainable option for delivering meaningful and necessary aphasia services. Despite the growing numbers of ICAPs, there is little evidence about their efficacy, effectiveness, or cost-effectiveness. All stakeholders need this evidence. Funding agencies require evidence to make decisions about their investments in aphasia rehabilitation. People with aphasia and their families should have evidence prior to investing their money and time into such programs, and speech and language pathologists have an ethical obligation to provide evidence-based practices. Based on evidence regarding treatment intensity that has translated principles of neuroplasticity from animal models to stroke recovery, the investigators hypothesize that 60 hours of comprehensive treatment will result in significant improvements in (a) performance-based, (b) client-reported, and (c) surrogate-reported assessments of communication skills, community participation, and health-related quality of life. They also hypothesize that when 60 hours of comprehensive treatment is provided intensively over 3 weeks, the magnitude and rate of improvement as well as the extent to which improvements are maintained will be greater than when the 60 hours of comprehensive treatment is distributed over 15 weeks. Because the investigators hypothesize that the magnitude and rate of improvement will be greater with the intensive ICAP than with the distributed ICAP, they further hypothesize that the intensive ICAP will be more cost-effective than the distributed ICAP.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
July 15, 2015
End Date
June 2022
Last Updated
3 years ago
Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Parallel
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Leora Cherney

Scientific Chair, Think & Speak Lab

Shirley Ryan AbilityLab

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • diagnosis of an aphasia subsequent to a left-hemisphere infarct that is confirmed by CT scan or MRI
  • an Aphasia Quotient score on the Western Aphasia Battery of 20-
  • 6 months post injury
  • premorbidly fluent in English
  • receiving no concomitant speech-language therapy

Exclusion Criteria

  • diagnosis of Global aphasia
  • any other neurological condition (other than cerebral vascular disease) that could potentially affect cognition or speech, such as Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, or traumatic brain injury
  • any significant psychiatric history prior to the stroke, such as severe major depression or psychotic disorder requiring hospitalization (subjects with mood disorders who are currently stable on treatment will be considered)
  • active substance abuse.

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Language Quotient of the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised (WAB-R LQ)

Time Frame: Change from pre-treatment to post-treatment (i.e. following completion of 60 hours of treatment at 3 weeks or 15 weeks depending on group assignment)

Includes a measure of auditory comprehension, oral expression, reading and written expression skills. Change from baseline to post-treatment and follow-up is reported.

Secondary Outcomes

  • The Communicative Effectiveness Index (CETI)(Change from pre-treatment to 3 month follow-up)
  • The Communication Confidence Rating Scale for Aphasia (CCRSA)(Change from pre-treatment to 3 month follow-up)
  • Assessment for Living with Aphasia (ALA)(Change from pre-treatment to 3 month follow-up)
  • Language Quotient of the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised (WAB-R LQ)(Change from pre-treatment to 3 month follow-up)

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials