Combining Executive Training and Anomia Therapy in Chronic Post-stroke Aphasia : a Single Case Experimental Design -SCED Preliminary Study
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Anomia
- Sponsor
- University Hospital, Montpellier
- Enrollment
- 10
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Evolution of individual naming scores
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 4 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
Aphasia is a devastating acquired language impairment mainly caused by stroke, in which anomia is a quintessential clinical feature. If speech-language therapy (SLT) has been shown to be effective for persons with aphasia, the relative efficiency of one SLT strategy over another remains a matter of debate. The influential relationship between language, executive functions and aphasia rehabilitation outcomes has been addressed in a number of studies, but only few of them have studied the effect of adding an executive training to linguistic therapies.The aim of this study is to measure the efficiency of a protocol combining anomia therapy and executive training on naming skills and discourse in post-stroke aphasic persons at the chronic stage
Investigators
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Evolution of individual naming scores
Time Frame: 2 days
Evolution of individual naming scores during baseline and treatment phases Participants are asked to name pictures from a personal naming task constituted of 100 black and white pictures and scores are expressed as percent of correct responses (min 0, max 100): higher percents meaning a better outcome. A visual analysis of the evolution of these scores along the course of the treatment will be conducted.
Comparison of discourse
Time Frame: 2 days
Comparison of discourse scores before and after the treatment For each participant, four different samples of discourse are elicited before and after the treatment (picture description, personal narrative, book supported narrative, procedural information). The mean number of correct words per minute is then computed for each participant, and compared between the two time points, higher scores meaning a better outcome.
Secondary Outcomes
- Comparison of executive scores(2 days)